Background & Aims

The Pain Responses Scale and its short form (PRS-SF) were recently developed to assess the affective, behavioural, and cognitive responses to pain based on the Behavioural Inhibition and Behavioural Activation Systems (BIS-BAS) model of chronic pain. The purpose of this study was to provide additional tests of the psychometric properties of the PRS-SF in a new sample of individuals with chronic pain.

Methods

A sample of N = 190 adults with chronic non-cancer pain from Spain completed a translated version of the PRS-SF and a battery of questionnaires measuring validity criteria hypothesized the be associated with BIS and BAS activation, including measures of sensitivity to punishment, sensitivity to reward, pain intensity, pain interference, catastrophizing, and pain acceptance.

Results

Confirmatory factor analysis supported a 4-factor structure for the PRS-SF assessing despondent, escape, approach, and relaxation responses (S-B ?2 (5) = 1.49, CFI = .99, NNFI = .99, RMSEA = .051, AIC= 4113.66), with marginal internal consistency for one scale (Relaxation) and adequate to good internal consistency for the others. The pattern of associations found between the PRS-SF scale scores and the validity criterion support the validity of the instrument.

Conclusions

The results provide additional support for the validity of the four PRS-SF scale scores, and the reliability of three of the scales. If these findings are replicated in future research, investigators may wish to administer more items from the original Relaxation scale when assessing this domain to ensure adequate reliability for this scale.

References

Day MA, Ehde DM, Jensen MP. Psychosocial pain management moderation: The limit, activate, and enhance model. J Pain. 2015;16:947-960.
Day MA, Jensen MP, Ehde DM, Thorn BE. Toward a theoretical model for mindfulness-based pain management. J Pain. 2014;15:691-703.
Day MA, Ward LC, de la Vega R, et al. Development of the pain responses scale: a measure informed by the BIS?BAS model of pain. Eur J Pain. 2022;26:505–521.
Gray JA. Brain systems that mediate both emotion and cognition. Cogn Emot. 1990;4:269–288.
Gray JA, McNaughton N. An enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system. Neuropsychol Anxiety. 2000:1–442
Jensen MP, Ehde DM, Day MA. The behavioral activation and inhibition systems: implications for understanding and treating chronic pain. J Pain. 2016;17:529.e1–529.e18
Jensen MP, Tan G, Chua SM. Pain intensity, headache frequency, and the behavioral activation and inhibition systems. Clin J Pain. 2015;31:1068-1074.
Jensen MP, Sole E, Castarlenas E, et al. Behavioral inhibition, maladaptive pain cognitions, and function in patients with chronic pain. Scand J Pain. 2017;17:41–48.
Serrano-Ibáñez ER, López-Martínez AE, Ramírez-Maestre C, et al. The behavioral inhibition and activation systems and function in patients with chronic pain. Pers Individ Dif. 2019a;138:56–62.
Serrano-Ibáñez ER, Ramírez-Maestre C, Esteve R, et al. The behavioural inhibition system, behavioural activation system and experiential avoidance as explanatory variables of comorbid chronic pain and posttraumatic stress symptoms. Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2019b;10:1581013.
Turner AP, Jensen MP, Day MA, et al. Behavioral activation and behavioral inhibition: an examination of function in chronic pain. Rehabil Psychol. 2021;66:57–64.

Presenting Author

Rocío de la Vega

Poster Authors

Alicia Eva López-Martínez

PhD

Universidad de Málaga, IBIMA Plataforma BIONAND, Malaga, Spain

Lead Author

Rosa Esteve. PhD

University of Málaga

Lead Author

Carmen Ramírez-Maestre

PhD

Universidad de Málaga, IBIMA Plataforma BIONAND, Malaga, Spain

Lead Author

Elena R. Serrano-Ibáñez

Universidad de Málaga

Lead Author

Rocío De la Vega

Ph.D.

University of Málaga

Lead Author

Melissa A. Day

PhD

Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences. University of Queensland (Australia).

Lead Author

Mark P. Jensen

PhD

University of Washington. Seattle, WA, USA

Lead Author

Topics

  • Assessment and Diagnosis