European Psychiatry - Volume 33 - March 2016

251 / 812

24th European Congress of Psychiatry / European Psychiatry 33S (2016) S116–S348 S247
Fig. 2 The coping appraisal flexibility model (S-B 2 = 121.62,
df = 19, CFI = 0.723, NNFI = 0.59, RMSEA = 0.17, 90% CI = 0.14, 0.19).
Fig. 3 The parallel model (S-B 2 = 147.51, df = 25, CFI = 0.695,
NNFI = 0.56, EMSEA = 0.56, 90% CI = 0.13, 0.18).
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.
EW381
The relationship between pain coping
variability and committed action in
chronic pain adjustment
W. Wong ∗ hen Chow Lim ong
L. McCracken ielding
1 Hong Kong Institute of Education, Dept of Special Education &
Counseling, Hong Kong, China
2 Alice Ho Miu Ling Hospital, Dept of Anesthesiology & Operating
Services, Hong Kong, China
3 Queen Mary Hospital, Dept of Anesthesiology & Operating Services,
Hong Kong, China
4 United Christian Hospital, Dept of Anesthesiology & Operating
Services, Hong Kong, China
5 King’s College London, Health Psychology Section, London, United
Kingdom
6 University of Hong Kong, School of Public Health, Hong Kong, China
∗ Corresponding author.
Introduction Research evidenced the association of pain coping
strategies with short-term and long-term adjustments to chronic
pain. Yet, previous studies mainly assessed the frequency of coping
strategies when pain occurs whilst no data is available on one’s
flexibility/rigidity in using different pain coping strategies, i.e., pain
coping variability, in dealing with different situations.
Objectives This study aimed to examine the multivariate asso-
ciation between pain coping variability and committed action
in predicting concurrent pain-related disability. Specifically, we
examined the independent effects of pain coping variability and
committed action in predicting concurrent pain-related disability
in a sample of Chinese patients with chronic pain.
Methods Chronic pain patients (n = 287) completed a test bat-
tery assessing pain intensity/disability, pain coping strategies and
variability, committed action, and pain catastrophizing. Multiple
regression modeling compared the association of individual pain
coping strategies and pain coping variability with disability (Mod-
els 1–2), and examined the independent effects of committed
action and pain coping variability on disability (Model 3).
Results Of the 8 coping strategies assessed, only guarding (std
ˇ = 0.17) was emerged as significant independent predictor of
disability (Model 1). Pain coping variability (std ˇ = −0.10) was
associated with disability after controlling for guarding and other
covariates (Model 2) and was emerged as independent predictor of
disability (Model 3: std ˇ = −0.11) (all P < 0.05)
Conclusions Our data offers preliminary support for the multi-
variate association between pain coping variability and committed
action in predicting concurrent pain-related disability, which sup-
plements the existing pain coping data that are largely based on
assessing frequency of coping.
Table 1 Multiple regression models predicting concurrent pain-
related disability with pain coping strategies and pain coping
variability.