Search

Occupational and social rehabilitation can be influenced by perceived injustice that results from pain. Currently, the Injustice Experience Questionnaire (IEQ), the tool most commonly used to assess perceived injustice, is not available in German. The aim of this study was the validation of the German-language version of the IEQ.The validation of the IEQ was carried out via a web-based survey. For this purpose, participants completed the IEQ and construct-related scales analogous to the original study Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK), Depression scale of the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scales (D-DASS), Pain Disability Index (PDI), and McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ). In addition, the participants completed questions on their socioeconomic status and on the cause of their pain, taken from the German Pain Questionnaire.Of 223 respondents, 134 (60.1%) returned a completed questionnaire and were included in the study. In all, 26.1% of participants reported suffering from pain resulting from accidents. None of the reviewed one- to three-factor solutions for the IEQ's structure achieved a good model fit. The best results were found for a two-factor solution, whereby the exploratory factor analysis revealed almost all items loaded highly on both factors and the confirmatory factor analysis showed high correlations between the factors. These findings are consistent with previous studies. The IEQ correlated highly and significantly with the other psychological instruments. There were no floor or ceiling effects. Cronbach's α for the German IEQ version was 0.93 and thus attests a high level of internal consistency.The analyses attest the excellent psychometric properties of the German translation of the IEQ and so the German-language version of the IEQ can be used as a validated questionnaire to screen for perceived injustice.

Introduction Occupational and social rehabilitation can be influenced by perceived injustice that results from pain. Currently, the Injustice Experience Questionnaire (IEQ), the tool most commonly used to assess perceived injustice, is not available in German. The aim of this study was the validation of the German-language version of the IEQ. Materials and methods The validation of the IEQ was carried out via a web-based survey. For this purpose, participants completed the IEQ and construct-related scales analogous to the original study Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK), Depression scale of the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scales (D-DASS), Pain Disability Index (PDI), and McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ). In addition, the participants completed questions on their socioeconomic status and on the cause of their pain, taken from the German Pain Questionnaire. Results Of 223 respondents, 134 (60.1%) returned a completed questionnaire and were included in the study. In all, 26.1% of participants reported suffering from pain resulting from accidents. None of the reviewed one- to three-factor solutions for the IEQ’s structure achieved a good model fit. The best results were found for a two-factor solution, whereby the exploratory factor analysis revealed almost all items loaded highly on both factors and the confirmatory factor analysis showed high correlations between the factors. These findings are consistent with previous studies. The IEQ correlated highly and significantly with the other psychological instruments. There were no floor or ceiling effects. Cronbach’s α for the German IEQ version was 0.93 and thus attests a high level of internal consistency. Conclusion The analyses attest the excellent psychometric properties of the German translation of the IEQ and so the German-language version of the IEQ can be used as a validated questionnaire to screen for perceived injustice.

Occupational and social rehabilitation is influenced by perceived injustice as a result of injury. To assess perceived injustice, the Injustice Experience Questionnaire (IEQ) has been developed and is available in English. The aim of this study was to translate and culturally adapt the English version of the IEQ into German.The IEQ was translated into German according to the criteria for the transcultural adaptation of self-assessment tools. The translation was examined in a sample of 19 pain patients as to whether the translated items were comprehensible, unacceptable or offensive, and what their meaning and the reason for the chosen response were. Data were assessed using nonparametric statistical methods.The German translation of the IEQ showed a high degree of comprehensibility. The items' meanings and participants' selected answer options were rated as highly plausible by two raters and the wording of the items was assessed as being neither unacceptable nor offensive by participants. Because of the slightly increased values with regard to Item 3, whose meaning was unrecognized by the raters, the term "Unachtsamkeit" was replaced by "Unaufmerksamkeit."The study attests to the cultural and linguistic intelligibility and precision of the German translation of the IEQ. In a follow-up study, the translation should be validated in a larger sample of pain patients.HINTERGRUND: Die berufliche und soziale Rehabilitation wird durch wahrgenommene Ungerechtigkeit infolge von Verletzungen beeinflusst. Zu deren Einschätzung ist der Injustice Experience Questionnaire (IEQ) auf Englisch verfügbar. Ziel dieser Studie war die deutschsprachige transkulturelle Übersetzung.Der IEQ wurde nach den Kriterien zur transkulturellen Anpassung von Selbsteinschätzungsinstrumenten ins Deutsche übersetzt. An einer Stichprobe von 19 Schmerzpatienten wurde untersucht, ob die übersetzten Items unverständlich, inakzeptabel oder anstößig waren und was deren Bedeutung und der Grund für die gewählte Antwortoption war. Die Auswertung der Daten erfolgte mit nichtparametrischen statistischen Verfahren.Die deutsche Übersetzung des IEQ zeigte ein hohes Maß an Verständlichkeit. Die Bedeutung der Items und die gewählten Antwortoptionen wurden von zwei Beurteilern als in hohem Maß plausibel eingestuft und die Formulierung der Items von den Teilnehmenden weder als inakzeptabel noch als beleidigend bewertet. Aufgrund leicht erhöhter Werte bei der nicht erkannten Bedeutung durch die Beurteilern bei Item 3 wurde in diesem der Begriff Unachtsamkeit durch Unaufmerksamkeit ersetzt.Die Studie attestiert der Übersetzung des IEQ gute Verständlichkeit und Präzision. In einer Folgestudie sollte die Übersetzung an einer größeren Schmerzpatientenstichprobe validiert werden.

The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version. The Publisher's final version can be found by following the DOI link. Introduction: Occupational and social rehabilitation is influenced by perceived injustice as a result of injury. To assess perceived injustice, the Injustice Experience Questionnaire (IEQ) has been developed and is available in English. The aim of this study was to translate and culturally adapt the English version of the IEQ into German. Methodology: The IEQ was translated and adapted into German according to the criteria for transcultural adaptation of self-assessment tools. The translation was examined in a sample of 19 pain patients for its comprehensibility and item meanings, as well as offensiveness. Data were assessed using nonparametric statistical methods. Results: The German translation of the IEQ showed a high degree of comprehensibility. The items’ meanings and participants’ selected answer options were rated as highly plausible by two raters. Item wordings were rated neither as offensive nor unacceptable by participants. The German translation of the english term “negligence” in item 3 by the term “Unachtsamkeit” was assessed as misunderstandable, therefore it was replaced by the term “Unaufmerksamkeit". Conclusion: The study attests the cultural and linguistic intelligibility and precision of the German translation of the IEQ. In a follow-up study, the translation should be validated in a larger sample of pain patients.

Zusammenfassung: Kaumuskelschmerzen sind nach Zahnschmerzen die häufigsten Schmerzen in der Kiefer-Gesichts-Region. Nach einer Zusammenfassung der vom Interdisziplinären Arbeitskreis für Mund- und Gesichtsschmerzen der Deutschen Schmerzgesellschaft im Jahre 2007 veröffentlichten Therapieempfehlungen wird anhand einer Literaturrecherche der Kenntnisstand von Ätiologie, Diagnostik und therapeutischen Möglichkeiten aktualisiert. Es erfolgte eine systematische Literatursuche in PubMed, der Cochrane Library und der Verlagsdatenbank der Deutschen Zahnärztlichen Zeitschrift. Die Ergebnisse bestätigen unsere früheren Empfehlungen, dass bei der überwiegenden Zahl der Patienten mit nichtinvasiven, reversiblen Maßnahmen Schmerzlinderung bzw. Schmerzfreiheit erreicht werden kann. Kurz- und Langzeitstudien haben weitere Belege dafür geliefert, dass verschiedene Behandlungsverfahren vergleichbar wirksam sind. Bei chronischen Verläufen ist neben der biomedizinischen Standardtherapie eine schmerzpsychologische Betreuung obligat. Als empfehlenswert wurden Aufklärung, Okklusionsschienen, physiotherapeutische Selbstbehandlung und Akupunktur, als eingeschränkt empfehlenswert physikalische Therapie, Pharmakotherapie und psychologische Schmerztherapie beurteilt

Zusammenfassung: Hintergrund: Im Jahre 2000 veröffentlichte der Interdisziplinäre Arbeitskreis für Mund- und Gesichtsschmerzen in der Deutschen Gesellschaft zum Studium des Schmerzes Empfehlungen zur Diagnostik und Klassifikation von Patienten mit Schmerzen im Bereich der Kaumuskulatur und/oder Kiefergelenke. Ziele der vorliegenden Publikation sind eine Bestandsaufnahme und Aktualisierung der damals gemachten Vorschläge. Ergebnisse: Sichtung und Bewertung der nach Veröffentlichung der Empfehlungen erschienenen Fachliteratur (bis Dezember 2005) zeigen, dass sich das zweiachsige Stufenkonzept zur Erfassung somatischer und psychosozialer Parameter orofazialer Schmerzen bewährt hat. Einzelne Aspekte der Empfehlungen wurden in Form wissenschaftlicher Belege weiter konkretisiert. Schlussfolgerungen: Die vorgeschlagenen Empfehlungen spiegeln die aktuellen Entwicklungen in der Schmerzmedizin wider. Insbesondere in der Zahnärzteschaft sollten sie daher eine noch breitere Verankerung finden als bisher

In 2009 the diagnosis chronic pain disorder with somatic and psychological factors (F45.41) was integrated into the German version of the International Classification of Diseases, version 10 (ICD-10-GM). In 2010 Paul Nilges and Winfried Rief published operationalization criteria for this diagnosis. In the present publication the ad hoc commission on multimodal interdisciplinary pain therapy of the German Pain Society now presents a formula for a clear validation of these operationalization criteria of the ICD code F45.41.

On behalf of the Medical/Psychological Pain Associations, Pain Patients Alliance and the Professional Association of Pain Physicians and Psychologists, the Joint Commission of Professional Societies and Organizations for Quality in Pain Medicine, working in close collaboration with the respective presidents, has developed verifiable structural and process-related criteria for the classification of medical and psychological pain treatment facilities in Germany. Based on the established system of graded care in Germany and on existing qualifications, these criteria also argue for the introduction of a basic qualification in pain medicine. In addition to the first-ever comprehensive description of psychological pain facilities, the criteria presented can be used to classify five different levels of pain facilities, from basic pain management facilities, to specialized institutions, to the Centre for Interdisciplinary Pain Medicine. The recommendations offer binding and verifiable criteria for quality assurance in pain medicine and improved pain treatment.

Pain perception is a complex experience that entails somatic and psychological factors. This is especially true for chronic pain where increasing chronicity leads to a growing significance of psychological factors such as learning and memory processes or cognitive evaluation at the expense of nociceptive processes. Hardly any other area of health-related research and health care has such an interdisciplinary organization of research, treatment, and education. Psychological pain research and psychological treatment of pain have become specializations in their own right. For the future of this research area, a differential analysis of the contribution of psychological factors to chronicity is important. For a mechanism-oriented treatment, the development of new treatment approaches and the analysis of specific subgroups for a better differential indication of treatments is needed.

The assessment of mental distress is a central aspect in pain research and treatment. Particularly for depression the comorbidity with pain poses methodological and conceptual challenges. This study examined the psychometric properties of the short version of the depression, anxiety and stress scale (DASS), used in both pain research and treatment and constructed to overcome the particular problems by omitting somatic items and concentrating on the psychological core aspects of depression, anxiety and stress.The psychometric properties of the DASS-21 were compared between patients with pain and various people without any pain problems (N = 950). The DASS has three subscales, depression, anxiety and stress, each with seven items. The construct validity of the DASS was examined using the hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) for anxiety and depression and the general depression scale (Allgemeine Depressionsskala, ADS) for depression. The sensitivity and specificity for depression were determined against a structured interview for diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-IV) and compared with the Center for Epidemiological Studies depression scale (CESD) and HADS in pain patients.Cronbach's alpha of the DASS for the depression subscale was at least 0.91, while the anxiety and stress subscales had Cronbach alphas of 0.78-0.82 and 0.81-0.89, respectively. Although the depression subscale has only 7 items, it is just as reliable as the ADS with 21 items. It also has a better sensitivity and specificity than the HADS in identifying clinical patients with depression.The DASS is a reliable questionnaire, free to use and brief to administer; therefore, it is an alternative to the previously used instruments for the screening of depression. Furthermore, the subscale stress measures irritability and tension, which are important aspects of pain experience but underused in assessment procedures for the diagnosis and treatment evaluation of patients with pain.