File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Assessing attitudes toward and beliefs about pain among Chinese patients with chronic pain: Validity and reliability of the Chinese version of the Pain Beliefs and Perceptions Inventory (ChPBPI)

TitleAssessing attitudes toward and beliefs about pain among Chinese patients with chronic pain: Validity and reliability of the Chinese version of the Pain Beliefs and Perceptions Inventory (ChPBPI)
Authors
Issue Date2011
PublisherElsevier Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jpainsymman
Citation
Journal Of Pain And Symptom Management, 2011, v. 42 n. 2, p. 308-318 How to Cite?
AbstractContext: Research consistently has evidenced the reliability and validity of the Pain Beliefs and Perceptions Inventory (PBPI). The instrument, however, has not been tested for its applicability and validity in non-Western populations. Objectives: To translate the English language version of the PBPI into Chinese (ChPBPI) and to evaluate its reliability, validity, and factor structure. Methods: A total of 208 Chinese patients with mixed origin chronic pain were recruited from an orthopedic specialist outpatient clinic associated with a public hospital in Hong Kong. In addition to the ChPBPI, patients were administered the Chronic Pain Grade (CPG) questionnaire, the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), the Center for Epidemiological Studies - Depression Scale (CES-D), and questions assessing sociodemographic characteristics. Results: Using the original factor structure of the PBPI as a model, confirmatory factor analyses revealed that all four ChPBPI scales demonstrated good data-model fit (CFI ≥ 0.92) and adequate internal consistency (Cronbach's αs: 0.60-0.76). The four ChPBPI scales showed significant positive correlations with CES-D, PCS, pain intensity, and disability. Results of hierarchical multiple regression analyses showed that the ChPBPI scales predicted concurrent depression (F(4, 187) = 6.01, P < 0.001), pain intensity (F(4, 186) = 4.61, P < 0.01), and pain disability (F(4, 190) = 3.54, P < 0.05) scores. Conclusion: These findings support the factorial validity of the scales of the ChPBPI, and its reliability and construct validity. Now clinically relevant beliefs about pain can be assessed among Chinese patients with chronic pain. © 2011 U.S. Cancer Pain Relief Committee. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/139856
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 2.649
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.514
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWong, WSen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWilliams, DAen_HK
dc.contributor.authorMak, KHen_HK
dc.contributor.authorFielding, Ren_HK
dc.date.accessioned2011-09-23T05:58:34Z-
dc.date.available2011-09-23T05:58:34Z-
dc.date.issued2011en_HK
dc.identifier.citationJournal Of Pain And Symptom Management, 2011, v. 42 n. 2, p. 308-318en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0885-3924en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/139856-
dc.description.abstractContext: Research consistently has evidenced the reliability and validity of the Pain Beliefs and Perceptions Inventory (PBPI). The instrument, however, has not been tested for its applicability and validity in non-Western populations. Objectives: To translate the English language version of the PBPI into Chinese (ChPBPI) and to evaluate its reliability, validity, and factor structure. Methods: A total of 208 Chinese patients with mixed origin chronic pain were recruited from an orthopedic specialist outpatient clinic associated with a public hospital in Hong Kong. In addition to the ChPBPI, patients were administered the Chronic Pain Grade (CPG) questionnaire, the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), the Center for Epidemiological Studies - Depression Scale (CES-D), and questions assessing sociodemographic characteristics. Results: Using the original factor structure of the PBPI as a model, confirmatory factor analyses revealed that all four ChPBPI scales demonstrated good data-model fit (CFI ≥ 0.92) and adequate internal consistency (Cronbach's αs: 0.60-0.76). The four ChPBPI scales showed significant positive correlations with CES-D, PCS, pain intensity, and disability. Results of hierarchical multiple regression analyses showed that the ChPBPI scales predicted concurrent depression (F(4, 187) = 6.01, P < 0.001), pain intensity (F(4, 186) = 4.61, P < 0.01), and pain disability (F(4, 190) = 3.54, P < 0.05) scores. Conclusion: These findings support the factorial validity of the scales of the ChPBPI, and its reliability and construct validity. Now clinically relevant beliefs about pain can be assessed among Chinese patients with chronic pain. © 2011 U.S. Cancer Pain Relief Committee. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.en_HK
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jpainsymmanen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Pain and Symptom Managementen_HK
dc.subject.meshAdulten_HK
dc.subject.meshAgeden_HK
dc.subject.meshAsian Continental Ancestry Groupen_HK
dc.subject.meshChronic Pain - psychologyen_HK
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_HK
dc.subject.meshHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, Practiceen_HK
dc.subject.meshHong Kongen_HK
dc.subject.meshHumansen_HK
dc.subject.meshMaleen_HK
dc.subject.meshMiddle Ageden_HK
dc.subject.meshPain Measurementen_HK
dc.subject.meshPsychometricsen_HK
dc.subject.meshQuestionnairesen_HK
dc.subject.meshReproducibility of Resultsen_HK
dc.titleAssessing attitudes toward and beliefs about pain among Chinese patients with chronic pain: Validity and reliability of the Chinese version of the Pain Beliefs and Perceptions Inventory (ChPBPI)en_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.emailFielding, R:fielding@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityFielding, R=rp00339en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2010.10.263en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid21402462-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-79961013121en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros192541en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-79961013121&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume42en_HK
dc.identifier.issue2en_HK
dc.identifier.spage308en_HK
dc.identifier.epage318en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000294111900015-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, WS=7403972073en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWilliams, DA=8085418400en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridMak, KH=12768176000en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridFielding, R=7102200484en_HK
dc.identifier.citeulike9004705-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats