Pain Catastrophizing and Impact on Pelvic Floor Surgery Experience

Author:

Powell T. Clark1,Meyer Isuzu1,Redden David T.2,Maier Julia3,Nguyen Christine3,Richter Holly E.1

Affiliation:

1. Division of Urogynecology and Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology

2. Center for Clinical and Translational Science

3. Heersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL

Abstract

Importance Understanding patients’ perceptions of symptoms and outcomes of urogynecologic surgery is essential for providing high-quality care. Objective The aim of the study was to assess association of pain catastrophizing with pelvic floor symptom distress and impact, postoperative pain, and voiding trial in patients undergoing urogynecologic surgery. Study Design Individuals whose self-identified gender was female and were undergoing surgery March 2020–December 2021 were included. Participants completed the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (range 0–52), Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory, and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire preoperatively. Pain catastrophizing was score ≥30 and describes the tendency to magnify the overall threat of pain. Voiding trial failure was inability to void ≥2/3 of instilled volume (≤300 mL). The association between pain catastrophizing and symptom distress and impact was assessed with linear regression. A P < 0.05 is significant. Results Three hundred twenty patients were included (mean age, 60 years, 87% White). Forty-six of 320 participants (14%) had a pain catastrophizing score ≥30. The pain catastrophizing group had higher body mass index (33 ± 12 vs 29 ± 5), more benzodiazepine use (26% vs 12%), greater symptom distress (154 ± 58 vs 108 ± 60), and greater urogenital (59 ± 29 vs 47 ± 28), colorectal (42 ± 24 vs 26 ± 23), and prolapse (54 ± 24 vs 36 ± 24) subscale scores, all P ≤ 0.02. The pain catastrophizing group had greater impact (153 ± 72 vs 72 ± 64, P < 0.01) and urogenital (60 ± 29 vs 34 ± 28), colorectal (36 ± 33 vs 16 ± 26), and prolapse (57 ± 32 vs 22 ± 27) subscale scores, P < 0.01. Associations remained controlling for confounders (P < 0.01). The pain catastrophizing group had higher 10-point pain scores (8 vs 6, P < 0.01) and was more likely to report pain at 2 weeks (59% vs 20%, P < 0.01) and 3 months (25% vs 6%, P = 0.01). Voiding trial failure did not differ (26% vs 28%, P = 0.98). Conclusions Pain catastrophizing is associated with greater pelvic floor symptom distress and impact and postoperative pain but not voiding trial failure.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Urology,Obstetrics and Gynecology,Surgery

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3