It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Background: Self-perceived burden and perceived burdensomeness are two apparently related constructs that have arisen independently from research in physical and mental health, respectively. Although both are associated with suicidal ideation in individuals with chronic pain, they have yet to be examined concurrently in the same group of patients.
Aims: The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between the two constructs and their differential prediction of suicidal ideation.
Methods: Participants were 260 outpatients of an interdisciplinary chronic pain treatment program. Each participant completed the Self-Perceived Burden Scale (SPBS), the Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire Perceived Burdensomeness Scale (INQPBS), the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation, and the thoughts of self-harm item of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9.
Results: The SPBS and the INQPBS were both unifactorial measures with good internal consistency. They correlated significantly with one another (r = 0.50, P < 0.001), as well as with scores on the two measures of suicidal ideation (rs ranging from 0.29 to 0.62, Ps < 0.001). However, the INQPBS correlated more highly with suicidal ideation than did the SPBS. In regression analyses, the INQPBS predicted unique variance in suicidal ideation after adjusting for the SPBS. Conversely, the SPBS did not contribute uniquely when the INQPBS was entered first.
Conclusions: Patients with chronic pain who believe that they have become “a burden to others” are at increased risk for suicidal ideation. The conceptual similarities and differences between the constructs of self-perceived burden and perceived burdensomeness are reviewed to explain why perceived burdensomeness is the stronger predictor of this increased risk.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 Department of Psychology, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
2 Department of Psychology, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Department of Anaesthesiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
3 Department of Psychology, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
4 Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
5 Department of Psychology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
6 Department of Psychology, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada