Gender Differences In Pain Research Articles

Gender differences in adolescent pain and pain-related coping

Gender differences exist in pain and the strategies used to cope with such negative states. Although it is it has been proposed that such gender differences manifest around puberty, somewhat surprisingly very little research has specifically investigated gender as a moderator of chronic pain within adolescents. The primary aim of the current study was to investigate gender differences in pain and coping within a group of 152 chronic pain sufferers. Patients consisted of 46 males and 106 females between the ages of 11 and 19 (mean = 14.76; SD = 1.71), with average chronic pain duration of 3.63 years, who had been referred to the Pain Management Unit at the Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases, United Kingdom. Patients completed a battery of measures including a pain experience visual analogue scale and a pain coping questionnaire. A series of independent t-tests revealed that although there were no gender differences in pain duration, males and females did differ in pain experiences over the past week (females = 7.10; males = 6.41; t (149) = 2.15, p<.05). Furthermore, gender differences were also found in seeking social support (females = 18.53; males = 16.10; t (129) = 2.613, p<.05), use of positive self statements (females = 14.69; males = 12.93; t (129) = 2.18, p<.05) and behavioral distraction (females = 9.71; males = 11.24; t (129) = −2.54, p<.05). Whereas females used more social support and positive statements, males reported engaging in more behavioural distraction. Furthermore, regression analysis revealed that of these coping strategies only behavioural distraction was found to mediate the relationship between gender and pain over the past week. This suggests that not only do gender differences exists in pain and pain-coping strategies within adolescents with chronic pain, but that behavioural distraction may be an important mechanism in understanding such differences. Gender differences exist in pain and the strategies used to cope with such negative states. Although it is it has been proposed that such gender differences manifest around puberty, somewhat surprisingly very little research has specifically investigated gender as a moderator of chronic pain within adolescents. The primary aim of the current study was to investigate gender differences in pain and coping within a group of 152 chronic pain sufferers. Patients consisted of 46 males and 106 females between the ages of 11 and 19 (mean = 14.76; SD = 1.71), with average chronic pain duration of 3.63 years, who had been referred to the Pain Management Unit at the Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases, United Kingdom. Patients completed a battery of measures including a pain experience visual analogue scale and a pain coping questionnaire. A series of independent t-tests revealed that although there were no gender differences in pain duration, males and females did differ in pain experiences over the past week (females = 7.10; males = 6.41; t (149) = 2.15, p<.05). Furthermore, gender differences were also found in seeking social support (females = 18.53; males = 16.10; t (129) = 2.613, p<.05), use of positive self statements (females = 14.69; males = 12.93; t (129) = 2.18, p<.05) and behavioral distraction (females = 9.71; males = 11.24; t (129) = −2.54, p<.05). Whereas females used more social support and positive statements, males reported engaging in more behavioural distraction. Furthermore, regression analysis revealed that of these coping strategies only behavioural distraction was found to mediate the relationship between gender and pain over the past week. This suggests that not only do gender differences exists in pain and pain-coping strategies within adolescents with chronic pain, but that behavioural distraction may be an important mechanism in understanding such differences.

Is There a Gender Difference in Painful Bone Metastases?

Purpose. To examine if there were any gender differences in bone pain and its functional interference among patients referred for palliative radiotherapy. To investigate any gender differences in analgesic consumption and the response to radiation treatmen. Methods and Materials. Patients with bone metastases treated with palliative radiotherapy were interviewed using the Brief Pain Inventory at baseline, 1, 2, and 3 months following the radiation treatment. Patients were asked to rate on a scale of 0-10 their worst, average and current pain as well as how pain interfered with the following: general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep and enjoyment of life. Analgesic consumption in the previous 24 hours and other patient demographics were recorded too. Independent non-parametric Wilcoxon tests were used to evaluate for gender differences in quantitative variables. P value < 0.01 was considered statistically significant. Results. Between May 2003 and April 2005, 199 patients (102 males, 97 females) were accrued. The median Karnofsky Performance Status was 70 and the median age was 66 years. The most common primary cancer sites were prostate, breast and lung. Female reported more severe worst pain (mean 8.3 compared to 7.6 for males. p = 0.0081) even after adjustment of primary cancer sites. There was no gender difference in the functional interference scores, analgesic consumption, and the response to radiation treatment. Conclusion. Our finding of a gender difference in worst pain scores needs to be confirmed in larger studies.

Gender differences in pain, fatigue, and depression in patients with cancer.

A quick review of virtually any research topic documents the pervasiveness of sex and gender bias throughout all of science. A large portion of both animal and human research has been, and continues to be, done primarily with male subjects. This gender bias influences research results and often leads to inappropriate and questionable generalizations of research findings, usually from studies done with male participants to females. Needless to say, this bias exists in symptom management research on pain, fatigue, and depression in patients with cancer. This article reviews the evidence from the studies on gender differences in pain, fatigue, and depression in patients with cancer. It should be noted that research studies on gender differences in cancer-related pain, fatigue, and depression are minimal in number, are restricted to studies of the differences in prevalence rates and severity scores, and for the most part have yielded inconsistent results. Additional investigations are warranted to determine whether the gender differences in prevalence rates and severity of these symptoms represent clinically meaningful differences. If these gender differences are substantiated, these findings will guide the design of studies to elucidate the underlying mechanisms for these differences, as well as the development and testing of gender specific interventions to treat cancer-related pain, fatigue, and depression.

Gender differences in pain, coping, and mood in individuals having osteoarthritic knee pain: a within-day analysis

This study examined gender differences in prospective within-day assessments of pain, pain coping, and mood in men and women having OA, and analyzed gender differences in dynamic relations between pain, mood, and pain coping. A sample of 64 women and 36 men diagnosed as having pain due to osteoarthritis of the knee(s) rated their pain, pain coping, and mood two times each day (once in the afternoon and once in the evening) for 30 days using a booklet format. Two gender differences were found in between person-analyses: women used more problem focused coping than men, and women who catastrophized were less likely than men to report negative mood. Several within-day and across-day gender differences were noted. First, women were much more likely to show a significant increase in pain over the day. Second, men were more likely than women to experience an increase in coping efficacy over the day. Third, men were more likely than women to use emotion-focused coping when their mood was more negative. Finally, men were more likely than women to experience an increase in negative mood and a decrease in positive mood in the morning after an evening of increased pain. Taken together, these findings underscore the importance of obtaining multiple daily assessments when studying gender differences in the pain experience.

Gender Differences in Experienced Pain, Mood, Energy, Appetite, and Sleep by Cancer Patients in Palliative Care

Purpose:The aim was to study gender differences in pain and quality indicators of terminally ill cancer patients in advanced home care.Method:A descriptive, not randomised study with self-reported questionnaires about experiences of pain, energy, mood, appetite, and sleep. The 27 patients filled in the questionnaires every day during a period for 4 weeks.Main research variables:Pain was measured with VAS (Visual Analogue Scale). The quality indicators, such as mood, energy, appetite, and sleep were measured on the DT-scale (Delighted Terrible-scale).Findings:Women experienced significantly more pain over time than men, and overall the results showed significant gender differences in the correlation between pain and quality indicators.Conclusions:Both women and men with cancer spent their last time in life in low QoL (Quality of Life) in a state of moderate pain. Despite their hopeless situation in life the estimated experience of quality was around 50% of the highest possible value.Implications for Nursin...

Sex-related influences on pain: A review of mechanisms and clinical implications.

Objective: To review the literature regarding gender-related influences on the experience of pain. Methods: Medline searches and reference lists were used to locate published articles regarding gender differences in pain. Results: Women are at increased risk for many clinical pain conditions and for increased severity of clinical pain relative to men. Women typically report lower pain threshold and tolerance and higher pain ratings than men in laboratory research. Contributing factors include sex hormones, pain modulatory systems, family history, stereotypic sex roles, and affective/cognitive factors. Conclusions: The clinical implications of gender differences in pain responses are discussed, including gender differences in pain treatment outcomes. Gender-related factors affect pain considerably and merit additional attention in pain research and treatment. Pain is associated with many conditions for which individuals seek rehabilitation, and rehabilitation interventions are often accompanied by pain. Indeed, pain is sometimes conceptualized as both an impediment to and an indicator of progress (e.g., “No pain, no gain”). Thus, an understanding of individual difference factors that influence pain is important in the rehabilitation setting. Pain is a complex experience sculpted by multiple biological, psychological, and sociocultural forces. Sex (i.e., the biological classification of male vs. female) and gender (i.e., one’s selfrepresentation of being male or female that is based on both sex and social considerations) recently have received increasing attention as individual difference variables that influence pain. Understanding the influence of gender is particularly relevant in the rehabilitation setting because the prevalence of disability is greater among women than men (Leveille, Penninx, Melzer, Izmirlian, & Guralnik, 2000; Leveille, Resnick, & Balfour, 2000), and disability specifically associated with pain is more frequent among women (Rethelyi, Berghammer, & Kopp, 2001). Moreover, several painrelated conditions common in rehabilitation settings show gender differences in prevalence, including rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis (Buckwalter & Lappin, 2000; Verbrugge, 1995), and multiple sclerosis (Duquette et al., 1992), which are more common among women, and spinal cord injury (Nobunaga, Go, & Karunas, 1999), which occurs more frequently in men. The purpose of this review is to discuss the influence of gender on pain responses. First, the nature of gender differences in pain responses is presented. Then, potential mechanisms underlying these effects are reviewed, and the clinical implications for pain management are then explored.

Gender Differences in Pain and Function after Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Gender Differences in Pain and Function after Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Gender Differences in Pain and Pain Behavior: The Role of Catastrophizing

This research examined gender differences in catastrophizing and pain in 80 healthy students (42 women, 38 men) who participated in an experimental pain procedure. Participants completed the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS; Sullivan, Bishop & Pivik, 1995) prior to immersing one arm in ice water for 1 minute. Participants were later interviewed to assess the strategies they used to cope with their pain. Independent raters examined videotape records and coded participants' pain behavior during and following the ice water immersion. Results showed that women reported more intense pain and engaged in pain behavior for a longer period of time than men. When PCS scores were statistically controlled, gender was no longer a significant predictor of pain or pain behavior. For women, the helplessness subscale of the PCS contributed unique variance to the prediction of pain and pain behavior. For men, none of the PCS subscales contributed unique variance to the prediction of pain and pain behavior. Discussion addresses the social learning factors that may contribute to gender differences in pain. Discussion also addresses the limitations and clinical implications of the findings.

Gender differences in pain

A literature survey reveals clear evidence of sex differences in the incidence of painful conditions and their severity, both being greater in women. The possible causes of this sexual dimorphism are discussed. Sex-role stereotyping may be relevant and there is evidence to indicate that, perhaps through their roles as carers, women seek and utilize more medical services than men. Less clear-cut evidence for anatomical and physiological differences is reviewed, together with documentation of hormonal (and reproductive cycle) influences on the operation of those systems.

Visceral pain and gender differences in pain

My commentary on mcmahon addresses the fact that only peripheral data have been considered for explaining differential sensibility in somato- and viscerosensory systems. This fails to take it into account that central processing for visceral and somatic inputs is now known to depend on different functional pathways. My commentary on berkley points out that the hypothalamus-pituitary axis is more responsive to stress in females than in males.

Gender differences in Pain: Role of anxiety

A review of the literature on gender and clinical pain reveals a disproportionate representation of women receiving treatment for many pain conditions and suggests that women report more severe pain, more frequent pain, and pain of longer duration than do men. Gender differences in pain perception have also been extensively studied in the laboratory, and ratings of experimentally induced pain also show some sex disparity, with females generally reporting lower pain thresholds and tolerance than males. However, there is little consensus on whether these apparent differences reflect the way men and women respond to pain, differing social rules for the expression of pain, or biologic differences in the way noxious stimuli are processed. In this paper, our working hypothesis is that the higher prevalence of chronic orofacial pain in women is a result of sex differences in generic pain mechanisms and of as-yet unidentified factors unique to the craniofacial system. We will review the evidence concerning gender differences in the prevalence of pain conditions, with a focus on orofacial pain conditions. Evidence and hypotheses concerning biologic and psychosocial factors that could influence prevalence rates will also be discussed.

Gender differences in pain: Epidemiologic perspectives

I n their Focus article, Drs. Fillingim and Maixner have reviewed data on gender differences in responsiveness to experimental noxious stimuli, interpreted those data as indicating that women are more sensitive to noxious stimuli than men, and proposed a model of how a range of biological and psychological factors might contribute to these gender-associated differences in pain sensitivity. The model is intriguing and is well grounded in the animal literature on sex differences in pain transmission and pain modulation systems. However, because the authors' stated motivation for assessing gender-related differences in pain responsiveness is that certain pain conditions (e.g., migraine headache, fibromyalgia, temporomandibular disorder pain) are more prevalent in women than in men, and that persons with these predominantly female pain conditions exhibit enhanced sensitivity to laboratory pain procedures, additional perspectives from clinical and epidemiologic pain research may be relevant. Specifically, this commentary will introduce an epidemiologic approach to the issue of gender differences in pain that may be useful for exploring alternative interpretations of the data presented and identifying strengths and weaknesses of the model proposed. Epidemiology is the study of the distribution and determinants of diseases or conditions in populations. '° The science of epidemiology is grounded in three important perspectives: the population perspective, the ecological perspective, and the developmental perspective. Elsewhere, we have presented an extensive discussion of the application of these perspectives to the study of pain: This article focuses 'more specifically on what these three perspectives have to offer in terms of

Gender differences in pain.

Apparent gender differences have been identified in epidemiologic surveys of patients with pain and in clinical studies of responses to pain. Women are reported to have lower pain thresholds and lower pain tolerance than men have. Whether women are more willing to report pain than men are or experience pain differently than men do is unclear. However, beliefs about gender differences and pain affect nurses' decisions made regarding the treatment of pain. This article reviews the literature addressing pain in women and suggests how clinical practice is affected. Literature from Medline (1966 to 1994), CINAHL (1983 to 1994), and Psych-Lit (1967 to 1994) data bases was searched using the key words pain, gender, and sex. Comments in the manuscript reflect only those studies addressing epidemiology, experimentally-induced pain, or pain in the clinical setting. Studies describing gender differences in an animal model were not included. Limitations of space required that representative examples of studies in the major areas be included; others describing similar design and outcome were not included.