Psychometric evaluation reveals strong reliability and internal consistency in the CPAQ for chronic pain, indicating its applicability.
Chronic pain remains a significant health concern, particularly among older adults. Pain acceptance - engaging in valued activities despite pain without attempting to control or avoid it - is thought to buffer against the negative psychosocial impacts of chronic pain. The present study aimed to adapt to Polish and evaluate the psychometric properties of a widely used measure of pain acceptance, namely the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ). Two samples of individuals with chronic pain participated: an online sample (N = 418) and a hospital-recruited sample (N = 148). Confirmatory factor analyses assessed one-factor, two-correlated-factor, and two-orthogonal-factor models for both the original 20-item (CPAQ-20) and the short 8-item (CPAQ-8) versions. In both samples, the results consistently supported a two-factor correlated structure for the Polish CPAQ-8: Activity Engagement (AE) and Pain Willingness (PW). The CPAQ-20 did not show adequate fit. The CPAQ-8 demonstrated acceptable-to-good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.63-0.78 total; 0.75-0.82 subscales) and moderate test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.57). The Minimal Detectable Change for the total score was 9.34 points. In the online sample, CPAQ-8 scores negatively correlated with pain anxiety, pain catastrophizing, anxiety, and depression. Across both samples, total CPAQ-8 and PW scores, but not AE, were negatively associated with pain. Participants reporting activity limitations scored significantly lower on CPAQ-8. Additionally, age was positively correlated with AE scores in both samples. Overall, the Polish CPAQ-8 exhibits good psychometric properties and is suitable for both research and clinical applications. Future studies should examine its longitudinal validity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kłosowska et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: