ABSTRACT
This article examines the utility of using a multidimensional instrument to assess pain coping in two samples of persons with rheumatoid arthritis (total N = 378). The predictive validity of the newly developed Vanderbilt Multidimensional Pain Coping Inventory (VMPCI), which assesses eleven distinct coping strategies, was compared to that of the previously validated Vanderbilt Pain Management Inventory (VPMI), which assesses the two broad dimensions of active and passive coping. In both samples, the VMPCI demonstrated reliable incremental validity over the VPMI in predicting both positive and negative psychological adjustment, and the predictive ability of the VPMI was highly redundant with that of the VMPCI. Moreover, using the VMPCI, both positive and negative adjustment were related to multiple coping strategies in ways that could not be revealed by the VPMI. These results offer considerable validation to the VMPCI and illustrate the value of assessing coping multidimensionally.
Subject(s)
Adaptation, Psychological , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/psychology , Pain/psychology , Sick Role , Defense Mechanisms , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Personality Inventory/statistics & numerical data , Psychometrics , Quality of Life , Reproducibility of ResultsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the relationship of gender and psychological well-being (PWB) in community-dwelling persons with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHOD: Data from the first wave of two longitudinal panel studies of persons with RA were examined (93 men and 276 women in panel 1; 60 men and 147 women in panel 2). Subjects completed self-report questionnaires on behavioral aspects of RA. Psychological well-being was assessed in both panels by the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale, using its 4 subcomponents, including positive and negative affect. Panel 2 had additional measures of PWB, namely the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule and the Satisfaction With Life Scale. Potential explanatory variables were then examined in an attempt to account for the observed gender differences. RESULTS: Gender differences were found for negative indicators of PWB, while positive indicators of PWB showed no significant differences by gender. As with other community samples, women reported higher levels of depressive symptoms and negative mood than men. Quality of emotional support, passive pain coping, and physical functional impairment could only partially explain the observed gender differences in this study. CONCLUSION: The relationship of gender to negative indicators of PWB cannot easily be diminished or dismissed. The mechanisms by which gender differentially affects PWB need to be further explored in order to intervene appropriately to help men and women with RA achieve an optimal quality of life.
