Jingwei Wu

Reciprocal Relationship Between Pain and Depression: A 12-Month Longitudinal Analysis in Primary Care

UNLABELLED Pain and depression are the most prevalent physical and psychological symptom-based disorders, respectively, and co-occur 30 to 50% of the time. However, their reciprocal relationship and potentially causative effects on one another have been inadequately studied. Longitudinal data analysis involving 500 primary care patients with persistent back, hip, or knee pain were enrolled in the Stepped Care for Affective Disorders and Musculoskeletal Pain (SCAMP) study. Half of the participants had comorbid depression and were randomized to a stepped care intervention (n = 123) or treatment as usual (n = 127). Another 250 nondepressed patients with similar pain were followed in a parallel cohort. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. Mixed effects model repeated measures (MMRM) multivariable analyses were conducted to determine if change in pain severity predicted subsequent depression severity, and vice versa. Change in pain was a strong predictor of subsequent depression severity (t-value = 6.63, P < .0001). Likewise, change in depression severity was an equally strong predictor of subsequent pain severity (t-value = 7.28, P < .0001). Results from the full cohort were similar in the clinical trial subgroup. In summary, pain and depression have strong and similar effects on one another when assessed longitudinally over 12 months. PERSPECTIVE This study strengthens the evidence for a bidirectional and potentially causative influence of pain and depression on one another. A change in severity of either symptom predicts subsequent severity of the other symptom. Thus, recognition and management of both conditions may be warranted, particularly when treatment focused on 1 condition is not leading to an optimal response.

Effect of Telecare Management on Pain and Depression in Patients With Cancer: A Randomized Trial

CONTEXT Pain and depression are 2 of the most prevalent and treatable cancer-related symptoms, yet they frequently go unrecognized, undertreated, or both. OBJECTIVE To determine whether centralized telephone-based care management coupled with automated symptom monitoring can improve depression and pain in patients with cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Randomized controlled trial conducted in 16 community-based urban and rural oncology practices involved in the Indiana Cancer Pain and Depression (INCPAD) trial. Recruitment occurred from March 2006 through August 2008 and follow-up concluded in August 2009. The participating patients had depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 score > or = 10), cancer-related pain (Brief Pain Inventory [BPI] worst pain score > or = 6), or both. INTERVENTION The 202 patients randomly assigned to receive the intervention and 203 to receive usual care were stratified by symptom type. Patients in the intervention group received centralized telecare management by a nurse-physician specialist team coupled with automated home-based symptom monitoring by interactive voice recording or Internet. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Blinded assessment at baseline and at months 1, 3, 6, and 12 for depression (20-item Hopkins Symptom Checklist [HSCL-20]) and pain (BPI) severity. RESULTS Of the 405 participants enrolled in the study, 131 had depression only, 96 had pain only, and 178 had both depression and pain. Of the 274 patients with pain, 137 patients in the intervention group had greater improvements in BPI pain severity over the 12 months of the trial whether measured as a continuous severity score or as a categorical pain responder (> or = 30% decrease in BPI) than the 137 patients in the usual-care group (P < .001 for both). Similarly, of the 309 patients with depression, the 154 patients in the intervention group had greater improvements in HSCL-20 depression severity over the 12 months of the trial whether measured as a continuous severity score or as a categorical depression responder (> or = 50% decrease in HSCL) than the 155 patients in the usual care group (P < .001 for both). The standardized effect size for between-group differences at 3 and 12 months was 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33-1.02) and 0.39 (95% CI, 0.01-0.77) for pain, and 0.42 (95% CI, 0.16-0.69) and 0.41 (95% CI, 0.08-0.72) for depression. CONCLUSION Centralized telecare management coupled with automated symptom monitoring resulted in improved pain and depression outcomes in cancer patients receiving care in geographically dispersed urban and rural oncology practices. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00313573.

The Association of Depression and Anxiety with Health-Related Quality of Life in Cancer Patients with Depression and/or Pain

Objectives: Depression is known to be a major problem in cancer patients, and evidence is emerging about the importance of anxiety. Because the disorders are highly comorbid, we examined the relationship of anxiety and depression with health‐related quality of life (HRQL) in cancer patients.

The association of depression and pain with health-related quality of life, disability, and health care use in cancer patients.

CONTEXT Pain and depression are two of the most prevalent and treatable cancer-related symptoms, each present in at least 20%-30% of oncology patients. OBJECTIVE To determine the associations of pain and depression with health-related quality of life (HRQL), disability, and health care use in cancer patients. METHODS The Indiana Cancer Pain and Depression study is a randomized clinical trial comparing telecare management vs. usual care for patients with cancer-related pain and/or clinically significant depression. In this article, baseline data on patients enrolled from 16 urban or rural community-based oncology practices are analyzed to test the associations of pain and depression with HRQL, disability, and health care use. RESULTS Of the 405 participants, 32% had depression only, 24% pain only, and 44% both depression and pain. The average Hopkins Symptom Checklist 20-item depression score in the 309 depressed participants was 1.64 (on 0-4 scale), and the average Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) severity score in the 274 participants with pain was 5.2 (on 0-10 scale), representing at least moderate levels of symptom severity. Symptom-specific disability was high, with participants reporting an average of 16.8 of the past 28 days (i.e., 60% of their days in the past four weeks) in which they were either confined to bed (5.6 days) or had to reduce their usual activities by 50% (11.2 days) because of pain or depression. Moreover, 176 (43%) participants reported being unable to work because of health-related reasons. Depression and pain had both individual and additive adverse associations with quality of life. Most patients were currently not receiving care from a mental health or pain specialist. CONCLUSION Depression and pain are prevalent and disabling across a wide range of types and phases of cancer, commonly co-occur, and have additive adverse effects. Enhanced detection and management of this disabling symptom dyad is warranted.

Sex differences in pain and pain-related disability among primary care patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain

BACKGROUND Although previous research suggests women report more severe pain than men, evidence for sex-related differences in pain-related disability is conflicting. Also, the impact of psychological factors on sex differences in disability is uncertain. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study is to assess sex differences in pain-related disability and evaluate whether they are accounted for by psychological factors. METHODS Analysis of baseline data from the Stepped Care for Affective disorders and Musculoskeletal Pain study. Participants included 241 male and 249 female primary care patients with moderately severe persistent pain of the back, hip, or knee. Multivariable log-linear models were used to determine the association between sex and pain-related disability and whether sex differences persisted after adjustment for psychiatric comorbidity and potential psychological mediators. RESULTS Compared with men, women reported worse pain intensity, greater pain-related interference with function, and more disability days due to pain. They also had worse depression, anxiety, and self-efficacy. Sex differences in pain interference with function and pain disability days remained significant in multivariable models. Depression, poor self-efficacy, and fear of reinjury were independently associated with disability in both men and women. CONCLUSIONS Women report greater pain-related disability than do men, even after controlling for depression, anxiety, and other psychological factors. Pain management strategies that target functional disability may be particularly important in the treatment of women with pain.

Operating Characteristics of PROMIS Four-Item Depression and Anxiety Scales in Primary Care Patients with Chronic Pain

OBJECTIVE Depression and anxiety are prevalent in patients with chronic pain and adversely affect pain, quality of life, and treatment response. The purpose of this psychometric study was to determine the reliability and validity of the four-item Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) depression and anxiety scales in patients with chronic pain. DESIGN Secondary analysis of data from the Stepped Care to Optimize Pain care Effectiveness study, a randomized clinical trial of optimized analgesic therapy. SETTING Five primary care clinics at the Roudebush VA Medical Center (RVAMC) in Indianapolis, Indiana. SUBJECTS Two hundred forty-four primary care patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. METHODS All patients completed the four-item depression and anxiety scales from the PROMIS 29-item profile, as well as several other validated psychological measures. The minimally important difference (MID) using the standard error of measurement (SEM) was calculated for each scale, and convergent validity was assessed by interscale correlations at baseline and 3 months. Operating characteristics of the PROMIS measures for detecting patients who had probable major depression or were anxiety-disorder screen-positive were calculated. RESULTS The PROMIS scales had good internal reliability, and the MID (as represented by two SEMs) was 2 points for the depression scale and 2.5 points for the anxiety scale. Convergent validity was supported by strong interscale correlations. The optimal screening cutpoint on the 4- to 20-point PROMIS scales appeared to be 8 for both the depression and anxiety scales. CONCLUSIONS The PROMIS four-item depression and anxiety scales are reasonable options as ultra-brief measures for screening in patients with chronic pain.

Comparative Responsiveness of Pain Measures in Cancer Patients

UNLABELLED Brief measures to assess and monitor pain in cancer patients are available, but few head-to-head psychometric comparisons of different measures have been reported. Baseline and 3-month data were analyzed from 274 patients enrolled in the Indiana Cancer Pain and Depression (INCPAD) trial. Participants completed the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the PEG (a 3-item abbreviated version of the BPI), the short form (SF)-36 pain scale, and a pain global rating of change measure. The global rating was used as the criterion for standardized response mean and receiver operating characteristic curve analyses. To assess responsiveness to the trial intervention, we evaluated standardized effect size statistics stratified by trial arm. All measures were responsive to global improvement, discriminated between participants with and without improvement, and detected a significant intervention treatment effect. Short and longer measures were similarly responsive. Also, composite measures that combined pain severity and interference into a single score (BPI total, PEG, SF-36 pain) performed comparably to separate measures of each domain (BPI severity and BPI interference). PERSPECTIVE Pain measures as brief as 2 or 3 items that provide a single score are responsive in patients with cancer-related pain. Ultra-brief measures offer a valid and efficient means of assessing and monitoring pain for the clinical management as well as research of cancer-related pain.

Longitudinal Comparison of Three Depression Measures in Adult Cancer Patients

CONTEXT Although a number of depression measures have been used with cancer patients, longitudinal comparisons of several measures in the same patient population have been infrequently reported. OBJECTIVES To compare the Hopkins Symptom Checklist 20-item depression scale, Short-Form 36 Mental Health Inventory five-item distress scale, and Patient Health Questionnaire nine-item depression scale in adults with cancer. METHODS Of the 309 cancer patients enrolled in a telecare management trial for depression, 247 completed the three depression measures at both baseline and at three months and a retrospective assessment of global rating of change in depression at three months. Internal consistency and construct validity of each measure were evaluated. Responsiveness was compared by calculating standardized response means and receiver operating characteristic area under the curve, using global rating of change as the external comparator measure. Differences between intervention and control groups in depression change scores were compared by calculating standardized effect sizes (SESs). RESULTS Internal reliability coefficients for the three measures were ≥0.77 at baseline and ≥0.84 at three months. Construct validity was supported with strong correlations of the depression measures among themselves, moderately strong correlations with other measures of mental health, and moderate correlations with vitality and disability. In terms of responsiveness, standardized response means for all measures significantly differentiated between three groups (improved, unchanged, and worse) as classified by patient-reported global rating of change in depression at three months. The three measures were able to detect a modest treatment effect in the intervention group compared with the control group (SES ranging from 0.21 to 0.43) in the full sample, whereas detecting a greater treatment effect in depressed participants with comorbid pain (SES ranging from 0.30 to 0.58). Finally, the three measures performed similarly in detecting patients with improvement. CONCLUSION The Hopkins Symptom Checklist 20-item depression scale, Mental Health Inventory five-item distress scale, and Patient Health Questionnaire nine-item depression scale were established as reliable, valid, and responsive depression measures in adults with cancer. Given the current recommendations for measurement-based care, our study shows that clinicians treating depressed cancer patients have several measures from which to choose.

Cancer-Related Pain and Disability: A Longitudinal Study

CONTEXT Although the cross-sectional association between cancer-related pain and disability is well established, their longitudinal relationship has been less studied. OBJECTIVES Data from the Indiana Cancer Pain and Depression (INCPAD) trial were analyzed to determine whether baseline cancer-related pain and changes in pain over time predict disability over 12 months. METHODS A total of 274 cancer survivors with cancer-related pain were accrued in the INCPAD trial. Data were collected at baseline, one, three, six, and 12 months by interviewers blinded to treatment arm. Disability outcomes included a continuous measure (Sheehan Disability Scale [SDS] score) and a categorical measure (≥14 days in the past four weeks with a ≥50% reduction in usual activities). Predictor variables, operationalized by the Brief Pain Inventory, included baseline pain severity and changes in pain severity scores between each time point. Multivariable analyses were conducted adjusting for treatment group, baseline disability, and selected covariates including depression. RESULTS Baseline pain severity did not predict disability outcomes at 12 months. However, improvement in pain severity predicted less disability over 12 months both in terms of SDS scores (b=-0.17, t=-5.33, P<0.001) and ≥14 disability days in the past month (odds ratio=0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-0.93; P<0.001). CONCLUSION Disability over 12 months in patients with cancer-related pain is predicted by changes in pain severity over time. Results suggest that effective pain management may reduce subsequent disability among cancer survivors.

SOMATOSENSORY AMPLIFICATION AND MENOPAUSAL SYMPTOMS IN BREAST CANCER SURVIVORS AND MIDLIFE WOMEN

OBJECTIVES Somatosensory amplification is the experience of sensing everyday bodily sensations as intense, agitating, and unpleasant. Using data from menopausal breast cancer survivors and midlife women without cancer, the study purposes were to (1) explore the psychometric properties of the Somatosensory Amplification Scale and (2) to describe somatosensory amplification and its relationship to menopausal symptoms of hot flashes, mood and sleep disturbance. STUDY DESIGN This was a cross-sectional, descriptive, correlational study using demographic, e-diary, and questionnaire data from 99 breast cancer survivors and 138 midlife women. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Somatosensory amplification, hot flashes (frequency, severity, bother, interference, perceived control), mood, and sleep. RESULTS Cronbachs alphas for the scale were low. When an 8-item version of the scale was evaluated, alphas improved and item-total correlations remained strong or improved. Midlife women and breast cancer survivors did not have significantly different somatosensory amplification total or item scores after adjusting for group differences in demographics. Somatosensory amplification was significantly correlated with hot flash interference, perceived control over hot flashes, and mood and sleep disturbance in both groups but the patterns of correlations differed slightly between groups and depending on whether the 10-item or 8-item scale was used. CONCLUSION Somatosensory amplification may be a relevant concept to assess in relation to the menopausal symptom experience of midlife women with and without breast cancer as it may represent a potential intervention target to improve the menopausal symptom experience.