TY - JOUR

T1 - Pressure pain sensitivity as a marker for stress and pressure pain sensitivity-guided stress management in women with primary breast cancer

AU - Axelsson, Christen K

AU - Ballegaard, Søren

AU - Karpatschof, Benny

AU - Schousen, Peer

PY - 2014/8

Y1 - 2014/8

N2 - OBJECTIVES: To validate (1) Pressure Pain Sensitivity (PPS) as a marker for stress and (2) a PPS-guided intervention in women with primary Breast Cancer (BC).METHODS: (1) A total of 58 women with BC were examined before and after 6 months of intervention. A control group of 165 women office employees was divided in a High Stress Group (HSG, n = 37) and a Low Stress Group (LSG, n = 128) to evaluate the association between PPS, questionnaire-related Quality of Life (QOL) and self-evaluated stress. (2) A PPS-guided stress management program (n = 40) was compared to a Psychosocial Group Intervention (PGI, n = 91) and no treatment (n = 86) with respect to a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaire measured QOL.RESULTS: (1) Resting PPS and changes in PPS during the intervention period correlated significantly to EORTC and Short Form 36 (SF 36) main scores: (all p < 0.05). Between BC, HSG and LSG there was a significant and positive correlation with respect to PPS, SF 36 main scores, depression, and clinical stress scores (all p < 0.05). However, the BC group scored significantly lower than both HSG and LSG (both p < 0.05) with respect to self-evaluated stress. (2) The PPS-guided intervention group improved EORTC main score, pain and nausea, when compared to the control groups (all p < 0.05).CONCLUSIONS: PPS was positively associated with QOL, which was in contrast to self-evaluated stress. PPS-guided intervention improved QOL in women with breast cancer.

AB - OBJECTIVES: To validate (1) Pressure Pain Sensitivity (PPS) as a marker for stress and (2) a PPS-guided intervention in women with primary Breast Cancer (BC).METHODS: (1) A total of 58 women with BC were examined before and after 6 months of intervention. A control group of 165 women office employees was divided in a High Stress Group (HSG, n = 37) and a Low Stress Group (LSG, n = 128) to evaluate the association between PPS, questionnaire-related Quality of Life (QOL) and self-evaluated stress. (2) A PPS-guided stress management program (n = 40) was compared to a Psychosocial Group Intervention (PGI, n = 91) and no treatment (n = 86) with respect to a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaire measured QOL.RESULTS: (1) Resting PPS and changes in PPS during the intervention period correlated significantly to EORTC and Short Form 36 (SF 36) main scores: (all p < 0.05). Between BC, HSG and LSG there was a significant and positive correlation with respect to PPS, SF 36 main scores, depression, and clinical stress scores (all p < 0.05). However, the BC group scored significantly lower than both HSG and LSG (both p < 0.05) with respect to self-evaluated stress. (2) The PPS-guided intervention group improved EORTC main score, pain and nausea, when compared to the control groups (all p < 0.05).CONCLUSIONS: PPS was positively associated with QOL, which was in contrast to self-evaluated stress. PPS-guided intervention improved QOL in women with breast cancer.

U2 - 10.3109/00365513.2014.900187

DO - 10.3109/00365513.2014.900187

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 24697620

VL - 74

SP - 399

EP - 407

JO - Scandinavian Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Investigation

JF - Scandinavian Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Investigation

SN - 0036-5513

IS - 5

ER -