Back

Impact of self-reported interoceptive abilities on postoperative pain

Weldam, B. P.; Meijer, L. L.; van den Bosch, O. F. C.; van Driel, M. E. C.; Timmerman, L.; van Dijk, J. F. M.; Strick, M.; IPOP research group, ; Rijsdijk, M.

2026-10-11 pain medicine
10.64898/2026.10.08.26365039 medRxiv
Show abstract

Interoception is described as the sensitivity to internal bodily stimuli, and plays an important role in pain perception. Heightened interoceptive sensibility (i.e. self-reported interoceptive abilities) may reinforce misinterpretation of stimuli, enhancing pain perception. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between interoceptive sensibility and acute postoperative pain. Interoceptive sensibility was measured using the Private Body Consciousness Scale in two prospective observational surgical cohorts: a Caesarean delivery cohort (C-section cohort) of 146 patients, and a lower extremity orthopaedic surgery cohort (Ortho cohort) of 70 patients. One day after surgery, patients rated pain (primary outcome) and other postoperative symptoms (secondary outcomes) on a 0-10 scale. Bonferroni corrections were applied to secondary outcomes. Interoception positively correlated with pain (C-section cohort: Spearmans rho = 0.182, P = 0.028; Ortho cohort: rho = 0.259, P = 0.031), and with dizziness (C-section cohort: rho = 0.309, P = 0.002; Ortho cohort: rho = 0.348 P = 0.041) in both cohorts. In the C-section cohort, interoception correlated with shivering (rho = 0.321, P < 0.001). In the Ortho cohort, interoception correlated with nausea (rho = 0.366, P = 0.023) and helplessness (rho = 0.363, P = 0.026); whereas no correlation with pain catastrophising was found (rho = 0.240, P = 0.539). In pooled multiple linear regression analysis (n = 216), interoception predicted pain after controlling for age, sex and anaesthetic technique (B = 0.119, 95% CI [0.027-0.210], P = 0.011). These findings highlight the potential role of interoception in identifying patients at risk for acute postsurgical pain.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.