. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Jan 1.

Published in final edited form as: Pain. 2012 Oct 16;154(1):147–153. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2012.10.004

Table 3.

Models Testing Affective and Cognitive Mediators in the Relations between the Pain X Partnership Status Interaction and Physical Disability

Dependent Variable: Physical Disability	Potential Mediators
	Positive affect only	Catastrophizing only	Pain Coping Difficulty only	All Mediators
Predictors	b (SE)	b (SE)	b (SE)	b (SE)
Between-subject
Diagnosis: OA vs FM	19.56 (3.83)^***	19.12 (3.79)^***	15.54 (3.43)^***	16.80 (4.07)^***
Partnership group: UnP vs HighSat	3.09 (4.58)	2.86 (4.53)	3.03 (4.09)	3.49 (4.22)
Partnership group: LowSat vs HighSat	2.88 (4.95)	2.78 (4.91)	2.67 (4.42)	3.01 (4.56)
Within-subject
ΔPain	0.29 (0.04)^***	0.28 (0.04)^***	0.20 (0.05)^***	0.15 (0.04)^**
ΔPositive Affect	−12.06 (0.70)^***	-	-	−11.44 (0.70)^***
ΔCatastrophizing	-	5.21 (0.68)^***	-	1.71 (0.70)^*
ΔPain Coping Difficulty	-	-	7.68 (0.55)^***	6.37 (0.57)^***
ΔPain x Partnership group: UnP vs HighSat	0.12 (0.05)^*	0.13 (0.05)^*	0.10 (0.06)	0.08 (0.05)
ΔPain x Partnership group: LowSat vs HighSat	0.13 (0.06)^*	0.14 (0.06)^*	0.10 (0.06)	0.09 (0.05)

Note: OA=osteoarthritis; FM = fibromyalgia; UnP = unpartnered, HighSat = partnered,/high satisfaction, LowSat = partnered/low satisfaction.

Between-subject dfs range from 243–245. Within-subject dfs range from 5424–5542.

p < .05;

^**

p < .01;

^***

p < .001