Exaggerated pain report in litigants with malingered neurocognitive dysfunction

Area of Science:

• Neuroscience
• Psychology
• Forensic Psychology

Background:

• Chronic pain is frequently associated with litigation.
• Malingered neurocognitive dysfunction can complicate pain assessments.
• Objective measures are needed to identify exaggerated pain symptoms.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the efficacy of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Pain Disability Index (PDI), and Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire (MSPQ) in detecting malingered neurocognitive dysfunction in litigants with chronic pain.
• To compare the sensitivity and specificity of these measures.

Main Methods:

• Twenty-nine litigants meeting criteria for malingered neurocognitive dysfunction and reporting chronic pain were assessed.
• Scores on the MPQ, PDI, and MSPQ were compared to normative data from clinical pain patient samples.
• Sensitivity and specificity were calculated at 0.90 specificity.

Main Results:

• Litigants with malingered neurocognitive dysfunction scored significantly higher on the MPQ, PDI, and MSPQ compared to clinical pain patients.
• At 0.90 specificity, sensitivities were 0.21 for MPQ, 0.59 for PDI, and 0.90 for MSPQ.
• The MSPQ demonstrated a significant correlation with the Lees-Haley Fake Bad Scale (FBS).

Conclusions:

• The MSPQ is a superior tool for detecting exaggerated pain symptoms in litigants with suspected malingered neurocognitive dysfunction.
• The findings highlight the utility of the MSPQ in forensic and clinical pain evaluations.
• Further research should explore the MSPQ's performance across diverse litigant populations.