Interoceptive awareness predicts acute pain tolerance and catastrophizing in healthy subjects

Le résumé fourni par la source

Interoceptive awareness (IA) has been increasingly investigated in pain research, yet its role in responses to acute pain remains poorly understood. This cross-sectional study investigated how distinct dimensions of IA relate to pain tolerance, pain intensity, and pain catastrophizing in healthy adults. Eighty‑three pain‑free university students completed a Cold Pressor Test (CPT; 1 °C), during which pain tolerance (immersion time) and peak pain intensity (visual analog scale, VAS) were recorded. Interoceptive awareness and pain catastrophizing were assessed using the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA) and the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). Associations between IA and CPT outcomes were examined using Cox proportional hazards models and quantile regressions, while relationships between IA and catastrophizing were analyzed using multivariable linear regressions, controlling for gender. Higher scores on the MAIA Not Distracting dimension were associated with increased pain tolerance, whereas higher Emotional Awareness and higher PCS scores predicted earlier hand withdrawal. Pain catastrophizing also showed distinct associations with interoceptive awareness, with higher Body Listening predicting increased catastrophizing, and higher Not Worrying and Attention Regulation predicting lower catastrophizing across multiple PCS dimensions. No significant associations were found between IA and pain intensity. These findings indicate that interoceptive awareness is a multifaceted construct with distinct implications for acute pain responses. Regulatory and non‑threat‑oriented interoceptive skills appear adaptive, whereas heightened emotional appraisal and bodily vigilance may exacerbate maladaptive cognitive-emotional responses to pain. Together, the results highlight interoception as a relevant mechanism shaping individual differences in pain tolerance and catastrophizing, even in healthy populations.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.