Abstract
Our understanding of population pain epidemiology is largely based on national-level analyses. This focus, however, neglects potential cross-national, and especially sub-national, geographic variations in pain, even though geographic comparisons could shed new light on factors that drive or protect against pain. This article presents the first comparative analysis of pain in the U.S. and Canada, comparing the countries in aggregate and analyzing variation across states and provinces. Analyses are based on cross-sectional data collected in 2020 from 2,124 U.S. and 2,110 Canadian adults 18 years and older. Our pain measure is a product of pain frequency and pain-related interference with daily activities. We use regression and decomposition methods to link socioeconomic characteristics and pain, and inverse-distance weighting spatial interpolation to map pain scores. We find significantly and substantially higher pain in the U.S. than in Canada. The difference is accounted for by Americans’ lower economic wellbeing. Additionally, we find variation in pain within countries; the variation is statistically significant across U.S. states. Further, we identify nine hotspot states in the Deep South, Appalachia, and the West where respondents have significantly higher pain than those in the rest of the U.S. or Canada. This excess pain is partly attributable to economic distress, but a large part remains unexplained; we speculate that it may reflect the sociopolitical context of the hotspot states. Overall, our findings identify areas with high need for pain prevention and management; they also other scholars to consider geographic factors as important contributors to population pain.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was supported in part by the National Institute on Aging (R01AG055481, R01AG06535101A1) and the Canadian Social Science and Humanities Research Council Insight Grant. The authors or their institutions did not receive any payments or services from any third parties for any aspects of the submitted work. All work is solely that of the authors and does not necessarily represent the views of the National Institutes of Health or the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Recovery and Resilience COVID-19 survey was approved by the Ethics Board of the University of Western Ontario (Project ID 116046).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data will be posted by November 2021 at a server location accessible to all interested researchers. The URL will be determined at that time and the information will be updated in the article pdf. Scholars may also email anna.zajacova@uwo.ca or laura.stephenson@uwo.ca after November 2021 for the URL.
