Article
Pain Disability Index: Construct and discriminant validity

https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9993(91)90012-8Get rights and content

Abstract

The Pain Disability Index (PDI) was developed as a self-report measure of general and domain-specific, pain-related disability. This study's purpose was twofold: (1) to assess construct validity of the scale relative to other measures of pain-related disability and psychologic distress and (2) to assess the strength of the PDI, independent of pain intensity, in accounting for behavioral and psychologic aspects of disability. Results indicated stronger correlations for PDI factor 1 (discretionary activities) than factor 2 (obligatory activities), with factor scores significantly related to both psychologic distress and behavioral measures of disability. Partial correlation controlling for pain intensity demonstrated PDI factor 1 was significantly related to depression, employment status, and medication usage. The finding supports the usefulness of the PDI in providing important information on functional disability beyond what is provided by a simple measure of pain intensity.

References (14)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (105)

  • Deconstructing Pain Disability through Concept Analysis

    2019, Pain Management Nursing
    Citation Excerpt :

    In contrast to operationalizing the terms pain and disability independently, the term pain disability is narrowly concentrated in the clinical literature, with a focus on individuals experiencing pain. Circa 1990, the use of the concept centered on vocational status and the ability for individuals with chronic pain to return to work (Aronoff, 1991; Goldman & O'Neill, 1990; Jerome & Gross, 1991; Tait, Chibnall, & Krause, 1990). In 1991, Aronoff candidly specified that disability was a legal term, whereas impairment was a medical term and, further, that they were not to be substituted for one another.

  • Difficulties in emotion regulation and chronic pain-related disability and opioid misuse

    2018, Addictive Behaviors
    Citation Excerpt :

    Total scores range from 0 to 70, with higher scores indicative of greater levels of disability. The PDI has demonstrated good construct validity and good internal reliability (Jerome & Gross, 1991; Tait et al., 1990). The SOAPP-R is a self-report measure of risk for opioid medication misuse (Butler, Fernandez, Benoit, et al., 2008).

  • White Paper AGA: The Impact of Mental and Psychosocial Factors on the Care of Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease

    2017, Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology
    Citation Excerpt :

    Both measures can identify at-risk patients quickly, so appropriate referral or development of an opioid contract linked to monitoring and non-opioid treatment strategies can be implemented.43,44 Other survey measures to assess pain severity and interference are listed in Table 1 including an example of a visual analogue scale and the Brief Pain Inventory.48–52 Management strategies for pain in digestive diseases have been reviewed elsewhere and are beyond the scope of this paper.53–55

  • Can brief measures effectively screen for pain and somatic malingering? Examination of the Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire and Pain Disability Index

    2014, Spine Journal
    Citation Excerpt :

    Initial studies found that the PDI was able to differentiate between high and low disability groups in a postsurgery patient sample [4] and a chronic pain patient sample [24]. Jerome and Gross [25] suggested that the PDI may be useful in assessing additional characteristics of disability (eg, psychological stress and pain behavior). Additionally, the PDI was found to be highly correlated with the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire and reliable in the assessment of subjective disability among a sample of patients with low back pain [26].

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text