In sickness and in health: A cross-sectional analysis of concordance for musculoskeletal pain in 13,507 couples.

P Campbell,K.M Dunn,M Shraim,K.P Jordan

doi:10.1002/ejp.744

Abstract

BackgroundMusculoskeletal pain conditions are common and create substantial burden for the individual and society. While research has shown concordance between couples for risk of some diseases, e.g. heart disease or diabetes, little information is available on such effects for musculoskeletal pain conditions. Our aims were to investigate the presence of concordance between couples for consultations about pain, and to examine theoretical influences on such concordance.MethodsThis was a 1‐year cross‐sectional study of musculoskeletal pain consultations in a UK primary care database. In total 27,014 patients (13,507 couples) aged between 30 and 74 years were included. The main outcome measure was the presence of a musculoskeletal morbidity read code indicating a consultation for musculoskeletal conditions (any, back, neck, knee, shoulder, foot, osteoarthritis). Logistic regression was used to test associations with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).ResultsPatients whose partner had a musculoskeletal pain consultation were also more likely to consult for a musculoskeletal condition (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.12–1.32). This association was found to be strongest for shoulder disorders (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.06–3.47). No significant associations were found for other pain conditions.ConclusionResults show that partner concordance is present for consultations for some musculoskeletal conditions but not others. Possible explanations for concordance include the shared health behaviours between couples leading to potential heightened awareness of symptoms. Given the high prevalence of musculoskeletal pain within populations, it may be worth considering further the mechanisms that explain partner concordance.

Highlights

Research evidence demonstrates concordance between couples on the risk of illness and disease, most notably psychological well-being (Stimpson et al, 2006; Kouros and Cummings, 2010), and on diseases such as hypertension (Di Castelnuovo et al, 2009), diabetes (Khan et al, 2003) and heart disease (Schafer et al, 2004; Meyler et al, 2007).There are a number of suggested theoretical explanations for illness concordance between couples
Shared characteristics) between couples for risk of some diseases, e.g. heart disease or diabetes, little information is available on such effects for musculoskeletal pain conditions
This study has shown that partner concordance is present for musculoskeletal pain consultations within a primary care population

Summary

Introduction

Research evidence demonstrates concordance between couples on the risk of illness and disease, most notably psychological well-being (Stimpson et al, 2006; Kouros and Cummings, 2010), and on diseases such as hypertension (Di Castelnuovo et al, 2009), diabetes (Khan et al, 2003) and heart disease (Schafer et al, 2004; Meyler et al, 2007).There are a number of suggested theoretical explanations for illness concordance between couples. One explanation is affective contagion, where it is suggested that emotional states are mutually shared between couples leading to concordance on beliefs and behaviours (Goodman and Shippy, 2002). While research has shown concordance (i.e. shared characteristics) between couples for risk of some diseases, e.g. heart disease or diabetes, little information is available on such effects for musculoskeletal pain conditions. While research has shown concordance between couples for risk of some diseases, e.g. heart disease or diabetes, little information is available on such effects for musculoskeletal pain conditions. Results: Patients whose partner had a musculoskeletal pain consultation were more likely to consult for a musculoskeletal condition (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.12–1.32) This association was found to be strongest for shoulder disorders (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.06–3.47). Given the high prevalence of musculoskeletal pain within populations, it may be worth considering further the mechanisms that explain partner concordance

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion