Tıp Fakültesi Öğrencilerinde Problem Çözme ve Kronik Kas İskelet Sistemi Ağrısıyla Baş Etme Arasındaki İlişki: Kesitsel Çalışma

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı tıp fakültesi öğrencilerinde kronik kas iskelet sistemi ağrısıyla baş etme ve problem çözme arasındaki ilişkiyi değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Ocak 2024 ile Mart 2024 arasında yürütülen bu kesitsel çalışmaya toplam 245 tıp öğrencisi (140 kadın, 105 erkek) dahil edildi. Katılımcılar kartopu örnekleme tekniği kullanılarak çevrimiçi bir anket yoluyla çalışmaya alındı. Kronik kas-iskelet ağrısıyla baş etme, Ağrıyla Başetme Envanteri (ABE) kullanılarak değerlendirildi. Problem çözme becerisi Problem Çözme Envanteri (PÇE) kullanılarak değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Tıp fakültesi öğrencileri arasında kronik kas iskelet sistemi ağrısı prevalansı %80.8 idi. ABE'nin aktif başa çıkma alt grup ortanca skoru 2,0 idi (IQR, 1.63-2.38). ABE'nin pasif baş etme alt grup puanı ortalaması 2.10±0.49 idi. Ortalama PÇE skoru 86.7±18.8 idi. Kronik kas iskelet sistemi ağrısı olan bireylerde PÇE skorları ile ABE’nin aktif baş etme alt ölçek skoru arasında negatif korelasyon (r=-0.159, p=0.025), ABE’nin pasif baş etme alt ölçek puanı ile arasında ise pozitif korelasyon (r=0.210, p=0.003) mevcuttu. Çok değişkenli regresyon analizi, kronik kas iskelet sistemi ağrısı olan katılımcılarda PÇE skorunun ABE’nin aktif baş etme skoruyla ilişkili tek faktör olduğunu gösterdi (B=-0.004, p=0.024) (R2=0.026). Bunun yanı sıra, PÇE skoru (B=0.006, p=0.001) ve vizüel analog skala skoru (B=0.045, p=0.016) ABE’nin pasif baş etme skoruyla ilişkili faktörlerdi (R2=0.079). Sonuç: Problem çözme becerileri, kas iskelet sistemi ağrılarıyla baş etme stratejilerinin kullanımını etkileyebilir. Problem çözme becerilerinin geliştirilmesi ve hatta bu becerilerin erken yaştan itibaren öğretilmesi, kronik kas iskelet sistemi ağrılarının yönetiminde faydalı olabilir.

Keywords

• Kas iskelet sistemi ağrısı
• ağrıyla baş etme
• problem çözme
• tıp fakültesi öğrencisi

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PROBLEM SOLVING AND COPING WITH CHRONIC MUSCULOSKELETAL PAIN IN MEDICAL STUDENTS: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study is to assess the relationship between problem-solving and coping with chronic musculoskeletal pain in medical students. Material and Methods: A total of 245 medical students (140 female, 105 male) were included in this cross-sectional study, conducted between January 2024 and March 2024. Participants were recruited for the study via an online questionnaire using a snowball sampling technique. Coping with chronic musculoskeletal pain was evaluated using the Pain Coping Inventory (PCI). Problem solving was assessed using the Problem Solving Inventory (PSI). Results: The prevalence of chronic musculoskeletal pain among medical students was 80.8%. The median active coping subgroup score of the PCI was 2.0 (IQR, 1.63-2.38). The mean passive coping subgroup score of the PCI was 2.10±0.49. The mean PSI score was 86.7±18.8. The PSI scores were negatively correlated with the PCI active coping subscale score (r=-0.159, p=0.025) and positively correlated with the PCI passive coping subscale score (r=0.210, p=0.003) in individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Multivariate regression analysis showed that PSI score was the only factor associated with the PCI active coping score in the participants with chronic musculoskeletal pain (B=-0.004, p=0.024) (R2=0.026). The PSI score (B=0.006, p=0.001) and VAS score (B=0.045, p=0.016) were factors associated with the PCI passive coping score (R2=0.079). Conclusion: Problem-solving skills may influence the use of coping strategies for musculoskeletal pain. The development of problem-solving abilities, and even the teaching of such abilities from an early age, may prove beneficial in the management of chronic musculoskeletal pain.

Keywords

• Musculoskeletal pain
• pain coping
• problem solving
• medical student

References

1. Overstreet DS, Strath LJ, Jordan M, et al. A Brief Overview: Sex Differences in Prevalent Chronic Musculoskeletal Conditions. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(5):4521.
2. Cieza A, Causey K, Kamenov K, Hanson SW, Chatterji S, Vos T. Global estimates of the need for rehabilitation based on the Global Burden of Disease study 2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.. 2021;396(10267):2006-2017.
3. Torbey A, Kadri SA, Asaad S Al, et al. Studying the prevalence of musculoskeletal pain among a sample of medical students in Damascus, Syria. A cross-sectional study. Health Sci Rep. 2023;6(3):e1149.
4. Thejaswi SG, Mukerji A, Baliga S, Dewan SK, Verma A. Musculoskeletal pain among medical students and its association with perceived stress level: A cross-sectional study. J Educ Health Promot. 2023;12:143.
5. Ferreira-Valente A, Queiroz-Garcia I, Pais-Ribeiro J, Jensen MP. Pain Diagnosis, Pain Coping, and Function in Individuals with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain. J Pain Res. 2020;13:783-794.
6. Juliyanto E, Marwoto P, Iswari R, Wiyanto, Nugroho E, Mindyarto B. Brain activity of problem solving proccess: a systematic literarure review. JPCS. 2021;1918:52068.
7. Darvishi N, Farhadi M, Azmi-Naei B, Poorolajal J. The role of problem-solving skills in the prevention of suicidal behaviors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PloS one. 2023;18(10):e0293620.
8. Eccleston C, Crombez G. Worry and chronic pain: a misdirected problem solving model. Pain. 2007;132(3):233-236.

9. Eccleston C, Crombez G, Aldrich S, Stannard C. Worry and chronic pain patients: a description and analysis of individual differences. Eur J Pain. 2001;5(3):309-318.
10. Lauwerier E. Coping with chronic pain: Problem solving and acceptance (thesis). Ghent, Belgium. Ghent University, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences; 2013.
11. Kennedy-Shaffer L, Qiu X, Hanage WP. Snowball Sampling Study Design for Serosurveys Early in Disease Outbreaks. Am J Epidemiol. 2021;190(9):1918-1927.
12. Treede RD, Rief W, Barke A, et al. Chronic pain as a symptom or a disease: the IASP Classification of Chronic Pain for the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). Pain. 2019;160(1):19-27.
13. Kraaimaat FW, Evers AWM. Pain-coping strategies in chronic pain patients: psychometric characteristics of the pain-coping inventory (PCI). Int J Behav Med. 2003;10(4):343-363.
14. Hocaoğlu A. The Study of Reliability and Validity of the Pain Coping Inventory. Agri. 2019;31(1):32-41.
15. Hocaoğlu Uzunkaya A. A Mixed Method Evaluation of Cognitive Behavioral Group Psychotherapy Based Relaxation in Patients Diagnosed with Fibromiyalga Syndrome. Agri. 2021;33(2):64-83.
16. Sahin N, Sahin NH, Heppner PP. Psychometric properties of the problem solving inventory in a group of Turkish university students. Cognitive Ther Res. 1993;17(4):379-396.
17. Puntillo F, Giglio M, Paladini A, et al. Pathophysiology of musculoskeletal pain: a narrative review. Ther Adv in Musculoskelet Dis. 2021;13:1759720X21995067.
18. Nirvanie-Persaud L, Millis RM. Epigenetics and Pain: New Insights to an Old Problem. Cureus. 2022;14(9):e29353.
19. van den Hout JHC, Vlaeyen JWS, Heuts PHTG, Zijlema JHL, Wijnen JAG. Secondary prevention of work-related disability in nonspecific low back pain: does problem-solving therapy help? A randomized clinical trial. Clin J Pain. 2003;19(2):87-96.
20. Karp JF, Gao X, Wahed AS, et al. Effect of Problem-Solving Therapy Versus Supportive Management in Older Adults with Low Back Pain and Depression While on Antidepressant Pharmacotherapy. Am. J. Geriatr Psychiatry. 2018;26(7):765-777.
21. Suso-Ribera C, Camacho-Guerrero L, McCracken LM, Maydeu-Olivares A, Gallardo-Pujol D. Social problem solving in chronic pain: An integrative model of coping predicts mental health in chronic pain patients. J Health Psychol. 2016;21(6):1015-1025.
22. Barrett D. Dreams and creative problem-solving. Ann NY Acad Sci. 2017;1406(1):64-67.
23. Buysse DJ, Reynolds CF, Monk TH, Berman SR, Kupfer DJ. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index: a new instrument for psychiatric practice and research. Psychiat Res. 1989;28(2):193-213.