Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Distraction and coping with pain.

1984; American Psychological Association; Volume: 95; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.516

1939-1455

Kevin D. McCaul, James M. Malott,

Pediatric Pain Management Techniques

Distraction is thought to be an effective strategy for coping with pain-produced distress. The purpose of this article is to offer explicit conceptual explanations of why and when distraction will be effective and to review research related to this conceptual scheme. A theoretical case for the effectiveness of distraction is drawn from assumptions about (a) the importance of cognition in mediating the pain experience, and (b) the limited capacity available for focusing attention on different stimulus events. Combining these assumptions led to four principles that were examined with available data. Principle 1: Distraction will reduce distress as compared with uninstructed and placebo control conditions. Principle 2: Distraction techniques that require more attentional capacity will be more effective. Principle 3: Distraction will have stronger effects on pain stimuli of low intensity. Principle 4: Distraction will be more effective than sensation redefinition for mild pain stimuli, but the reverse will be true for intense pain stimuli. The data supported these principles, and this review discusses implications and research necessary for helping persons to cope with pain. Common sense suggests that an effective way to cope with pain is to distract oneself from the sensations or emotional responses resulting from the painful stimulus. When persons are asked to evaluate coping strategies, for example, distraction is rated as highly effective and is strongly preferred over alternative techniques (Ahles, Blanchard, & Leventhal, 1983; Corah, Gale, & Illig, 1979a, 1979b; Hackett & Horan, 1980; McCaul & Haugvedt, 1982). Kant (cited in Turk, 1978) illustrated the common sense use of distraction as follows: