Effects of assessment method (real-time versus video-recorded) on a validated pain-altered behavior scale used in castrated piglets.

We aimed to compare two assessment methodologies (real-time vs. video-recorded) using the Unesp-Botucatu Pig Composite Acute Pain Scale (UPAPS) in piglets before and after castration. Twenty-nine male piglets were castrated. Four observers scored the UPAPS over three perioperative timepoints of castration following two assessment methodologies. In real-time assessments, the observers were in-person observing the piglets in front of the pen. After two weeks, the observers did video-recorded assessments randomizing piglets and timepoints. Modeling was conducted to compare the UPAPS and each pain-altered behavior between methodologies. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman, and Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were conducted to investigate agreement between methodologies. UPAPS was statistically equivalent between methodologies (P = 0.4371). The ICC for each method was very good (0.85 to 0.91). The agreement of the UPAPS assessed between methodologies had minimal bias (- 0.04), no proportion bias, and 53% of the assessments presented a perfect agreement. However, CCC of the UPAPS was moderate (0.65), and only one pain-altered behavior ("presents difficulty in overcoming obstacles or other animals") occurred more in real-time assessments (P = 0.0444). In conclusion, piglet pain assessment by UPAPS can be conducted in real-time based on a suitable agreement between the real-time and video-recorded assessment methods.

Development and Validation of the Unesp-Botucatu Goat Acute Pain Scale.

We aimed to develop and validate the Unesp-Botucatu goat acute pain scale (UGAPS). Thirty goats (5 negative controls and 25 submitted to orchiectomy) were filmed for 7 min at the time points 24 h before and 2 h, 3 h (1 h after analgesia), and 24 h after orchiectomy. After content validation, according to an ethogram and literature, four blind observers analyzed the videos randomly to score the UGAPS, repeating the same assessment in 30 days. According to the confirmatory factor analysis, the UGAPS is unidimensional. Intra- and interobserver reliability was very good for all raters (Intraclass correlation coefficient ≥85%). Spearman's correlation between UGAPS versus VAS was 0.85 confirming the criterion validity. Internal consistency was 0.60 for Cronbach's α Cronbach and 0.67 for McDonald's ω. The item-total correlation was acceptable for 80% of the items (0.3-0.7). Specificity and sensitivity based on the cut-off point were 99% and 90%, respectively. The scale was responsive and demonstrated construct validity shown by the increase and decrease of scores after surgery pain and analgesia, respectively. The cut-off point for rescue analgesia is ≥3 of 10, with an area under the curve of 95.27%. The UGAPS presents content, criterion, and construct validities, responsiveness, and reliability to assess postoperative pain in castrated goats.

Measurement properties of pain scoring instruments in farm animals: A systematic review using the COSMIN checklist.

This systematic review aimed to investigate the measurement properties of pain scoring instruments in farm animals. According to the PRISMA guidelines, a registered report protocol was previously published in this journal. Studies reporting the development and validation of acute and chronic pain scoring instruments based on behavioral and/or facial expressions of farm animals were searched. Data extraction and assessment were performed individually by two investigators using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines. Nine categories were assessed: two for scale development (general design requirements and development, and content validity and comprehensibility) and seven for measurement properties (internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, criterion and construct validity, responsiveness and cross-cultural validity). The overall strength of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low) of each instrument was scored based on methodological quality, number of studies and studies' findings. Twenty instruments for three species (bovine, ovine and swine) were included. There was considerable variability concerning their development and measurement properties. Three behavior-based instruments scored high for strength of evidence: UCAPS (Unesp-Botucatu Unidimensional Composite Pain Scale for assessing postoperative pain in cattle), USAPS (Unesp-Botucatu Sheep Acute Composite Pain Scale) and UPAPS (Unesp-Botucatu Pig Composite Acute Pain Scale). Four instruments scored moderate for strength of evidence: MPSS (Multidimensional Pain Scoring System for bovine), SPFES (Sheep Pain Facial Expression Scale), LGS (Lamb Grimace Scale) and PGS-B (Piglet Grimace Scale-B). Most instruments (n = 13) scored low or very low for final overall evidence. Construct validity was the most reported measurement property followed by criterion validity and reliability. Instruments with reported validation are urgently required for pain assessment of buffalos, goats, camelids and avian species.

Measurement properties of pain scoring instruments in farm animals: A systematic review protocol using the COSMIN checklist.

Society has been increasingly concerned about the impact of pain on farm animal welfare. This systematic review aims to provide evidence relating to the measurement properties (i.e. reliability, validity, and sensitivity) of pain scoring instruments used for pain assessment in farm animals. A literature search will be performed using five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CAB abstracts and Biological Abstracts) and search terms related to pain, pain scales and different species of farm animals. Eligibility criteria will include full-text studies on the development and/or validation of acute and chronic pain scoring instruments for farm animals including bovine (beef and dairy), ovine, caprine, camel, swine and poultry. Exclusion criteria will include studies that report the use of pain scales for the validation of another instrument, or those reporting ethograms/list of behaviors potentially indicating pain without a scoring system. Study titles and their abstracts will be screened for eligibility by one investigator. Full-text articles will be independently reviewed for eligibility and evaluated by two investigators. Relevant information will be recorded and evaluated systematically according to the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist using an adapted data collection sheet. The following measurement properties and characteristics of the instruments will be assessed: content validity (internal consistency, structural and cross-cultural validity), reliability, measurement error, criterion and construct validity, responsiveness, interpretability and feasibility. Following the assessment of methodological quality and quality of the findings, evidence for each measurement property will be summarized into high, moderate, low or very low. This systematic review will provide further insights into the evidence-based measurement properties of pain scoring instruments in farm animals. It may identify possible gaps of knowledge with these tools as a potential target for future studies in farm animals with a positive impact on animal welfare.