Initial Psychometric Testing of a Pain Quality Pictogram Tool Among Hmong Limited English Proficient and Bilingual Community Members and Healthcare Practitioners.

PURPOSE: To assess the matching and content validity of a pain quality pictogram tool with a Hmong community. DESIGN: A Qualtrics survey was administered to two groups of participants. METHODS: Sixty Hmong participants (n = 49 limited English proficiency and bilingual Hmong community members in group 1; n = 11 bilingual Hmong healthcare practitioners in group 2) participated in this study. Hmong community members in group 1 were asked to identify the pain pictogram that best matched a pre-recorded Hmong pain quality phrase. The practitioners in group 2 were asked to evaluate how well each pain pictogram represented the pre-recorded Hmong pain quality phrase it intended to measure. To assess the matching, we assessed agreement between the pain concept in the phrase and the pictogram intended to represent it, using group 1. A content validity index (CVI) was calculated to assess the content validity of the tool using group 2. RESULTS: Among the community participants, 8 of the 15 pictograms were matched with the intended phrase almost perfectly, and 3 were matched by a substantial majority. There were no differences in matching by patient gender and language proficiency. Among practitioners, 11 of 15 pain pictograms met the CVI threshold of 0.70 for all three dimensions (i.e., representativeness, relevance, and comprehension). CONCLUSION: Findings support including most of the pain pictograms in the tool but suggest specific areas for improvement. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Findings provide insights for redesigning the selected pain pictogram tool to be used in clinical settings with LEP Hmong patients.

The usability of an AAC pain description system for patients with acquired expressive communication disorders.

Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) has been used by patients with acquired expressive communication disorders as an alternative to natural speech. The use of symbols to express pain, which is intangible, is challenging because designing a series of comprehensible symbols to represent personal experiences such as pain is not straightforward. This study describes (a) the development of symbols to express pain that were derived from Chinese pain-related similes and metaphors for an AAC mobile application developed specifically for this study known as PainDiary and (b) an assessment of the appropriateness of the app compared to conventional methods of collecting pain information. The symbols depicted headache pain and discomfort, which is prevalent among neurosurgical patients. The participants were 31 patients diagnosed with acquired expressive communication disorders who were receiving treatment in a neurosurgery general ward of Chang Gung Memorial Hospital in Taiwan and 14 nurses who worked on the ward. Pain information was collected by nurses using conventional methods and the PainDiary app. Assessment data, including the accuracy and efficiency of and user satisfaction with PainDiary, are compared. The results show that use of the app was effective in reporting pain and that patients required less time to report a pain event. The results further indicate that the PainDiary app was better received by younger individuals than by their older counterparts.

ABCDEF Bundle Practices for Critically Ill Children: An International Survey of 161 PICUs in 18 Countries.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate current international practice in PICUs regarding components of the "Assessing Pain, Both Spontaneous Awakening and Breathing Trials, Choice of Sedation, Delirium Monitoring/Management, Early Exercise/Mobility, and Family Engagement/Empowerment" (ABCDEF) bundle. DESIGN: Online surveys conducted between 2017 and 2019. SETTING: One-hundred sixty-one PICUs across the United States (n = 82), Canada (n = 14), Brazil (n = 27), and Europe (n = 38) participating in the Prevalence of Acute Rehabilitation for Kids in the PICU study. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 161 participating PICUs, 83% were in academic teaching hospitals and 42% were in free-standing children's hospitals. Median size was 16 beds (interquartile range, 10-24 beds). Only 15 PICUs (9%) had incorporated all six ABCDEF bundle components into routine practice. Standardized pain assessment (A) was the most common (91%), followed by family engagement (F, 88%) and routine sedation assessment (C) with validated scales (84%). Protocols for testing extubation readiness or conducting spontaneous breathing trials (B) were reported in 57%, with 34% reporting a ventilator weaning protocol. Routine delirium monitoring with a validated screening tool (D) was reported by 44% of PICUs, and 26% had a guideline, protocol, or policy for early exercise/mobility (E). Practices for spontaneous breathing trials were variable in 29% of Canadian PICUs versus greater than 50% in the other regions. Delirium monitoring was lowest in Brazilian PICUs (18%) versus greater than 40% in other regions, and family engagement was reported in 55% of European PICUs versus greater than 90% in other regions. CONCLUSIONS: ABCDEF bundle components have been adopted with substantial variability across regions. Additional research must rigorously evaluate the efficacy of specific elements with a focus on B, D, E, and full ABCDEF bundle implementation. Implementation science is needed to facilitate an understanding of the barriers to ABCDEF implementation and sustainability with a focus on specific cultural and regional differences.

Clinical Interpretation of Self-Reported Pain Scores in Children with Acute Pain.

OBJECTIVE: To identify self-reported pain scores that best represent categories of no pain, mild, moderate, and severe pain in children, and a pain score that accurately represents a child's perceived need for medication, that is, a minimum pain score at which a child would want an analgesic. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cross-sectional cohort study of children aged 6-17 years presenting to a pediatric emergency department with painful and nonpainful conditions. Pain was measured using the 10-point Verbal Numerical Rating Scale. Receiver operating characteristic -based methodology was used to determine pain scores that best differentiated no pain from mild pain, mild pain from moderate pain, and moderate pain from severe pain. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the perceived need for medication. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 548 children (51.3% female, 61.9% with a painful condition). The scores that best represent categories of pain intensity are as follows: 0-1 for no pain; 2-5 for mild pain; 6-7 for moderate pain; and 8-10 for severe pain. The area under the curve for the cut points differentiating each category ranged from 0.76 to 0.88. The median pain score representing the perceived need for medication was 6 (IQR, 4-7; range, 0-10). CONCLUSIONS: We identified population-level self-reported pain scores in children associated with categories of pain intensity that differ from scores conventionally used. Implementing our findings may provide a more accurate representation of the clinical meaning of pain scores and reduce selection bias in research. Our findings do not support the use of pain scores in isolation for clinical decision making or the use of a pain score threshold to represent a child's perceived need for medication.

Implications of nocebo in anaesthesia care.

Nocebo refers to non-pharmacological adverse effects of an intervention. Well-intended procedural warnings frequently function as a nocebo. Both nocebo and placebo are integral to the generation of 'real' treatment effects and their associated 'real' side-effects. They are induced or exacerbated by: context; negative expectancy; and negative conditioning surrounding treatment. Since the late 1990s, the neuroscience literature has repeatedly demonstrated that the nocebo effect is mediated by discrete neurobiological mechanisms and specific physiological modulations. Although no single biological mechanism has been found to explain the nocebo effect, nocebo hyperalgesia is thought to initiate from the dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex subsequently triggering the brain's descending pain modulatory system and other pain regulation pathways. Functional magnetic resonance imaging shows that expectation of increased pain is accompanied by increased neural activity in the hippocampus and midcingulate cortex which is not observed when analgesia is expected. Functional magnetic resonance imaging studies have shown that the anterior cingulate cortex is pivotal in the perception of affective pain evoked by nocebo words. Research has also explored neurotransmitters which mediate the nocebo effect. The neuropeptide cholecystokinin appears to play a key role in the modulation of pain by nocebo. Hyperalgesia generated by nocebo also increases the activity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis as indicated by increases in plasma cortisol. The avoidance or mitigation of nocebo needs to be recognised as a core clinical skill in optimising anaesthesia care. Embracing the evidence around nocebo will allow for phrases such as 'bee sting' and 'sharp scratch' to be thought of as clumsy verbal relics of the past. Anaesthesia as a profession has always prided itself on practicing evidence-based medicine, yet for decades anaesthetists and other healthcare staff have communicated in ways counter to the evidence. The premise of every interaction should be 'primum non nocere' (first, do no harm). Whether the context is research or clinical anaesthesia practice, the nocebo can be ignored no longer.

Subgrouping of Peripheral Neuropathic Pain Patients According to Sensory Symptom Profile Using the Korean Version of the PainDETECT Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: A culturally validated Korean version of the PainDETECT Questionnaire (PD-Q) was used to identify neuropathic pain components (NeP) in patients suffering from chronic pain. The purpose of this study was to determine if the Korean PD-Q can be used to subgroup patients with peripheral NeP according to sensory symptom profiles. METHODS: This study included 400 Korean patients with peripheral neuropathic pain diagnosed as probable or definite NeP. The total scores and subscores for each item in PD-Q were transformed into a Z-score for standardization. Hierarchical cluster analysis was performed to identify clusters of subjects by PD-Q scores. RESULTS: The mean total PD-Q score of the study participants was 14.57 ± 6.46. A hierarchical cluster analysis identified 5 clusters with distinct pain characteristic profiles. Cluster 1 had relatively severe burning and tingling sensations. The mean total PD-Q score for cluster 2 was the lowest of the 5 clusters. Cluster 3 tended to be vulnerable to pain in response to cold/heat stimulation. Cluster 4 showed relatively severe pain induced by physical stimuli, such as light touch or slight pressure. Cluster 5 had high scores for all NeP symptoms. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the ability of patients to cluster by symptoms using the Korean PD-Q. Subgrouping of peripheral neuropathic pain by sensory symptom profile may be useful in making effective drug treatment decisions.

Validation of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool-Neuro in brain-injured adults in the intensive care unit: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Pain assessment in brain-injured patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) is challenging and existing scales may not be representative of behavioral reactions expressed by this specific group. This study aimed to validate the French-Canadian and English revised versions of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT-Neuro) for brain-injured ICU patients. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted in three Canadian and one American sites. Patients with a traumatic or a non-traumatic brain injury were assessed with the CPOT-Neuro by trained raters (i.e., research staff and ICU nurses) before, during, and after nociceptive procedures (i.e., turning and other) and non-nociceptive procedures (i.e., non-invasive blood pressure, soft touch). Patients who were conscious and delirium-free were asked to provide their self-report of pain intensity (0-10). A first data set was completed for all participants (n = 226), and a second data set (n = 87) was obtained when a change in the level of consciousness (LOC) was observed after study enrollment. Three LOC groups were included: (a) unconscious (Glasgow Coma Scale or GCS 4-8); (b) altered LOC (GCS 9-12); and (c) conscious (GCS 13-15). RESULTS: Higher CPOT-Neuro scores were found during nociceptive procedures compared to rest and non-nociceptive procedures in both data sets (p < 0.001). CPOT-Neuro scores were not different across LOC groups. Moderate correlations between CPOT-Neuro and self-reported pain intensity scores were found at rest and during nociceptive procedures (Spearman rho > 0.40 and > 0.60, respectively). CPOT-Neuro cut-off scores ≥ 2 and ≥ 3 were found to adequately classify mild to severe self-reported pain ≥ 1 and moderate to severe self-reported pain ≥ 5, respectively. Interrater reliability of raters' CPOT-Neuro scores was supported with intraclass correlation coefficients > 0.69. CONCLUSIONS: The CPOT-Neuro was found to be valid in this multi-site sample of brain-injured ICU patients at various LOC. Implementation studies are necessary to evaluate the tool's performance in clinical practice.

Responsiveness of PROMIS and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) Depression Scales in three clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The PROMIS depression scales are reliable and valid measures that have extensive normative data in general population samples. However, less is known about how responsive they are to detect change in clinical settings and how their responsiveness compares to legacy measures. The purpose of this study was to assess and compare the responsiveness of the PROMIS and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) depression scales in three separate samples. METHODS: We used data from three clinical trials (two in patients with chronic pain and one in stroke survivors) totaling 651 participants. At both baseline and follow-up, participants completed four PROMIS depression fixed-length scales as well as legacy measures: Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item and 2-item scales (PHQ-9 and PHQ-2) and the SF-36 Mental Health scale. We measured global ratings of depression change, both prospectively and retrospectively, as anchors to classify patients as improved, unchanged, or worsened. Responsiveness was assessed with standardized response means, statistical tests comparing change groups, and area-under-curve analysis. RESULTS: The PROMIS depression and legacy scales had generally comparable responsiveness. Moreover, the four PROMIS depression scales of varying lengths were similarly responsive. In general, measures performed better in detecting depression improvement than depression worsening. For all measures, responsiveness varied based on the study sample and on whether depression improved or worsened. CONCLUSIONS: Both PROMIS and PHQ depression scales are brief public domain measures that are responsive (i.e., sensitive to change) and thus appropriate as outcome measures in research as well as for monitoring treatment in clinical practice. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01236521, NCT01583985, NCT01507688.

Evaluation of the EQ-5D-3L and 5L versions in low back pain patients.

BACKGROUND: The EuroQol EQ-5D is one of the most widely researched and applied patient-reported outcome measures worldwide. The original EQ-5D-3L and more recent EQ-5D-5L include three and five response categories respectively. Evidence from healthy and sick populations shows that the additional two response categories improve measurement properties but there has not been a concurrent comparison of the two versions in patients with low back pain (LBP). METHODS: LBP patients taking part in a multicenter randomized controlled trial of lumbar total disc replacement and conservative treatment completed the EQ-5D-3L and 5L in an eight-year follow-up questionnaire. The 3L and 5L were assessed for aspects of data quality including missing data, floor and ceiling effects, response consistency, and based on a priori hypotheses, associations with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Pain-Visual Analogue Scales and Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL-25). RESULTS: At the eight-year follow-up, 151 (87%) patients were available and 146 completed both the 3L and 5L. Levels of missing data were the same for the two versions. Compared to the EQ-5D-5L, the 3L had significantly higher floor (pain discomfort) and ceiling effects (mobility, self-care, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression). For these patients the EQ-5D-5L described 73 health states compared to 28 for the 3L. Shannon's indices showed the 5L outperformed the 3L in tests of classification efficiency. Correlations with the ODI, Pain-VAS and HSCL-25 were largely as hypothesized, the 5L having slightly higher correlations than the 3L. CONCLUSION: The EQ-5D assesses important aspect of health in LBP patients and the 5L improves upon the 3L in this respect. The EQ-5D-5L is recommended in preference to the 3L version, however, further testing in other back pain populations together with additional measurement properties, including responsiveness to change, is recommended. TRIAL REGISTRATION: retrospectively registered: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01704677 .

The Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment Scale for Patellar Tendinopathy (VISA-P): A Reliability Generalization Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Patella (VISA-P) is a questionnaire to assess the severity of patellar tendinopathies. Its use requires good reliability indicators: internal consistency, test-retest and parallel forms. Several studies have been published examining this question, but to date the reliability of this questionnaire (meta-analysis) has not been generalized. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis to generalize the reliability of the VISA-P. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus. STUDY SELECTION: Studies included were those examining the reliability coefficients of the VISA-P: Cronbach alpha, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and parallel-forms (correlation coefficients compared with other scales). DATA EXTRACTION: All coefficients were extracted and the mean reliability was obtained using fixed- or random-effects models. Sensitivity (leave-one-out analysis) was analyzed. Quality assessment was performed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 364 scientific articles, 12 fulfilled meta-analysis criteria. The summary statistic was 0.86 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78-0.92] for Cronbach alpha and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.89-0.97) for the ICC. Parallel forms depended on the comparative test used, ranging from -0.83 to 0.68. The sensitivity analysis found an influential study for the parallel-forms reliability in the Blazina score. We were unable to analyze the asymmetry of funnel plots and meta-regression models because of the number of studies. CONCLUSIONS: The reliability of VISA-P for assessing the severity of patellar tendinopathies requires greater evaluation with more scientific evidence before it can be implemented in clinical practice.

Test-Retest Reliability of Pain Measures in Institutionalized Older Adults: Number of Painful Body Sites, Pain Intensity, and Pain Extent.

OBJECTIVE: The reliability of pain assessment in frail and older adults has seldom been assessed. This study aims to assess the test-retest reliability of (1) the number of painful body sites, (2) pain intensity, and (3) pain extent in institutionalized older adults. METHODS: Seventy-four older adults who were institutionalized were assessed in 2 separate sessions, 2 days to 1 week apart, for pain intensity, number of painful body sites, and pain extent (in pixels) using a vertical pain numeric scale (0 to 10), a body chart divided into 50 body regions, and ImageJ, respectively. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable differences (MDDs) were calculated. RESULTS: In session 1, the mean values (± standard deviation) were 5.54 ± 2.12 points for pain intensity, 4.47 ± 3.27 for number of painful body sites, and 2,726.00 ± 2,322.09 for pain extent. ICCs were 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.72 to 0.89) for pain intensity, 0.89 (95% CI = 0.83 to 0.93) for number of painful body sites, and 0.74 (95% CI = -0.07 to 0.91) for pain area. The MDDs were 2.46 for pain intensity, 3.14 for number of painful body sites, and 4,997.60 for pain extent. CONCLUSIONS: The vertical pain rating scale and the body chart seem reliable to assess pain intensity and number of pain sites, respectively. The wide CI for the ICC found for pain area and the high measurement error compromise its potential clinical relevance.

Chronic pain diagnosis in refugee torture survivors: A prospective, blinded diagnostic accuracy study.

BACKGROUND: An estimated 87% of torture survivors experience chronic pain such as brachial plexopathy from upper extremity suspension or lumbosacral plexus injury from leg hyperextension. However, a vast majority of pain is undetected by evaluators due to a lack of diagnostic tools and confounding psychiatric illness. This diagnostic gap results in exclusive psychological treatment rather than multimodal therapies, substantially limiting rehabilitation. We hypothesized that the United Nations Istanbul Protocol (UNIP) would have a sensitivity of approximately 15% for pain detection, and that the use of a validated pain screen would improve its sensitivity by at least 29%, as compared to the reference standard (pain specialist evaluation). METHODS AND FINDINGS: This prospective blind-comparison-to-gold-standard study of survivors of torture, as defined by the World Medical Association, took place at Weill Cornell Medicine between February 1, 2017, and June 21, 2019. 11 women and 9 men, for a total of 20 participants, were included in the analysis. Five participants received 2 UNIP evaluations, for a total of 25 unique evaluations included in the analysis. Participants were representative of a global population, with home countries in Africa, Central America, South Asia, the Caribbean, and the Middle East. Methods of torture experienced were homogeneous, following the predictable pattern of systematic torture. Participants first received the standard evaluation protocol for torture survivors (UNIP) by a trained evaluator, and subsequently received a validated pain screen (Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form [BPISF]) followed by a noninvasive examination by a pain specialist physician (reference standard). The primary outcome was the diagnostic and treatment capability of the standard protocol (index test) versus the validated pain screen (BPISF), as compared to the reference standard. Trained evaluators performing the initial assessment with the UNIP (index test) were blinded to the study, and the pain specialist physician (reference standard) was blinded to the outcome of the initial UNIP evaluation and the BPISF; data from the initial UNIP assessment were not gathered by the principal investigator until all other study procedures were completed. Providers using only the UNIP captured pain in a maximum of 16% of evaluations, as compared to 85% of participants being diagnosed with pain by the reference standard. When employed, the validated pain screen had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 72%-100%) and a negative predictive value of 100%, as compared to a sensitivity of 24% (95% CI 8%-50%) and a negative predictive value of 19% (95% CI 5%-46%) for the index test. The difference in the sensitivity of the UNIP as compared to the BPISF was significant, with p < 0.001. No adverse events owing to participation in the study were reported by participants. Limitations of the study include small sample size, its single-site nature, and the exclusion of individuals who did not speak 1 of the 5 study languages. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that a validated pain screen can supplement the current global standard assessment of torture survivors, the UNIP, to increase the accuracy of pain diagnosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03018782.

Comparison of narcotic pain control between stereotactic electrocorticography and subdural grid implantation.

INTRODUCTION: The choice of subdural grid (SDG) or stereoelectroencephalography (sEEG) for patients with epilepsy can be complex and in some cases overlap. Comparing postoperative pain and narcotics consumption with SDG or sEEG can help develop an intracranial monitoring strategy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was performed for adult patients undergoing SDG or sEEG monitoring. Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) was used for pain assessment. Types and dosage of the opioids were calculated by converting into milligram morphine equivalents (MME). Narcotic consumption was analyzed at the following three time periods: I. the first 24 h of implantation; II. from the second postimplantation day to the day of explantation; and III. the days following electrode removal to discharge. RESULTS: Forty-two patients who underwent SDG and 31 patients who underwent sEEG implantation were analyzed. After implantation, average NRS was 3.7 for SDG and 2.2 for sEEG (P < .001). After explantation, the NRS was 3.5 for SDG and 1.4 in sEEG (P < .001). Sixty percent of SDG patients and 13% of sEEG patients used more than one opioid in period III (P < .001). The SDG group had a significantly higher MME throughout the three periods compared with the sEEG group: period I: 448 (SDG) vs. 205 (sEEG) mg, P = .002; period II: 377 (SDG) vs. 102 (sEEG) mg, P < .001; and period III: 328 (SDG) vs. 75 (sEEG) mg; P = .002. Patients with the larger SDG implantation had the higher NRS (P = .03) and the higher MME at period I (P = .019). There was no correlation between the number of depth electrodes and pain control in patients with sEEG. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing sEEG had significantly less pain and required fewer opiates compared with patients with SDG. These differences in perioperative pain may be a consideration when choosing between these two invasive monitoring options.

A comparison between the low back pain scales for patients with lumbar disc herniation: validity, reliability, and responsiveness.

BACKGROUND: Although the Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ), Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) has shown a preferable psychometric properties in patients with low back pain (LBP), but no study has yet determined these in conservative treatment of patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Thus the current study aimed to compare those scales in LDH patients receiving conservative treatment to select the better option to assess the severity of disease. METHODS: LDH patients were invited to complete the JOABPEQ, NPRS, ODI, RMDQ, and SF-36 twice. The internal consistency was evaluated by the Cronbach's α. Test-retest reliability was tested by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The relationships of these scales were evaluated by the Pearson correlation coefficients (r). The responsiveness was operationalised using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, as well as the comparison of smallest detectable change (SDC), minimum important change (MIC). RESULTS: A total of 353 LDH patients were enrolled. Four subscales of the Chinese JOABPEQ were over 0.70, then the ICCs for the test-retest reliability were over 0.75. For functional status, remarked negative correlations could be seen between JOABPEQ Q2-Q4 and ODI, as well as RMDQ (r = - 0.634 to - 0.752). For general health status, remarkable positive correlations could also be seen between Q5 Mental health and SF-36 PCS (r = 0.724) as well as SF-36 MCS (r = 0.736). Besides, the area under of the curves (AUC) of the JOABPEQ ranged from 0.743 to 0.827, indicating acceptale responsiveness, as well as the NPRS, ODI, and RMDQ. CONCLUSION: NPRS, and ODI or RMDQ is recommended in studies related to LDH patients, while if the quality of life also is needed to observe, the NPRS, and JOABPEQ would be more appropriate rather than SF-36.

Evaluating a sensitive issue: reliability of a clinical evaluation for allodynia severity.

Purpose/Aim: Allodynia is a common feature of neuropathic pain with few validated clinical evaluation options. We identified a need to estimate the measurement properties of the standardised evaluation procedure for static mechanical allodynia severity popularised by the somatosensory rehabilitation of pain method, known as the rainbow pain scale. This study (www.clinicaltrials.gov. NCT02070367) undertook preliminary investigation of the inter-rater and test-retest reliability of the rainbow pain scale.Methods: Persons with pain in one upper extremity after Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, a peripheral nerve injury or a recent hand fracture were recruited for assessment of static mechanical allodynia threshold using calibrated monofilaments by two raters at baseline, and repeated assessment one week later.Results: Single measures estimates suggested inter-rater reliability was substantial for the rainbow pain scale [intra-class correlation coefficient = 0.78 (n = 31), p < 0.001]. Test-retest reliability was also excellent at with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.87 [n = 28, p < 0.001]. However, confidence intervals suggest the true values could be more moderate, with lower bounds of the 95% confidence interval at 0.60 and 0.74, respectively.Conclusions: This pilot study has generated preliminary support for the inter-rater and test-retest reliability of the rainbow pain scale. Future studies should seek to increase confidence in estimates of reliability, and estimate validity and responsiveness to change in persons with somatosensory disorders.

Thirty-five Years of Acute Pain Services: Where Do We Go From Here?

Acute pain services (APS) have developed over the past 35 years. Originally implemented solely to care for patients with regional catheters or patient-controlled analgesia after surgery, APS have become providers of care throughout the perioperative period, with some institutions even taking the additional step toward providing outpatient services for patients with acute pain. Models vary considerably in terms of tasks and responsibilities, staffing, education, protocols, quality, and financing. Many challenges face today's APS, including the increasing number of patients with preexisting chronic pain, intake of analgesics and opioids before surgery, substance-dependent patients needing special care, shorter hospital stays, early discharge of patients in need of further analgesic treatment, prevention and treatment of chronic postsurgical pain, minimization of adverse events, and side effects of treatment. However, many APS lack a clear-cut definition of their structures, tasks, and quality. Development of APS in the future will require us to face urgent questions, such as, "What are meaningful outcome variables?" and, "How do we define high quality?" It is obvious that focusing exclusively on pain scores does not reflect the complexity of pain and recovery. A broader approach is needed-a common concept of surgical and anesthesiological services within a hospital (eg, procedure-specific patient pathways as indicated by the programs "enhanced recovery after surgery" or the "perioperative surgical home"), with patient-reported outcome measures as one central quality criterion. Pain-related functional impairment, treatment-induced side effects, speed of mobilization, as well as return to normal function and everyday activities are key.

Psychometric Properties of the Multidimensional Impression of Change in a Cohort of Pediatric Patients With Pain.

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the utility of the Multidimensional Patient Impression of Change (MPIC) questionnaire in a pediatric pain population after interdisciplinary treatment. DESIGN: Observational study with retrospective chart review. The observed treatment program included psychological counseling, relaxation training, physical therapy, occupational therapy, and physician management. SETTING: Outpatient pain management center affiliated with an academic rehabilitation hospital. PARTICIPANTS: A heterogeneous group of pediatric patients with chronic pain (N=202) who completed an interdisciplinary pain management program. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Measures assessing pain, mood, development, social functioning, physical functioning, and family functioning were administered pre- and posttreatment, and the MPIC was administered posttreatment. RESULTS: Statistically significant improvements were observed in all outcomes (P<.05). The majority of patients perceived themselves to be improved (minimally to very much) in all clinical domains of the MPIC, ranging from 60% (medication efficacy) to 96% (coping with pain). The MPIC ratings were significantly correlated with improvements in most of the outcome measures. The MPIC domains accounted for more than half of the unique variance in predictive models when added to the Patient Global Impression of Change, and most of the variance when added to the models first. CONCLUSIONS: The MPIC was found to be an effective screening tool for assessing patient perceived progress in a pediatric chronic pain population.

Measuring Pain in TBI: Development of the TBI-QOL Pain Interference Item Bank and Short Form.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a pain interference item bank, computer adaptive test (CAT), and short form for use by individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI). DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey study. SETTING: Five TBI Model Systems rehabilitation hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals with TBI (N=590). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. OUTCOME MEASURES: Traumatic Brain Injury-Quality of Life (TBI-QOL) Pain Interference item bank. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis provided evidence of a single underlying trait (χ2 [740]=3254.030; P<.001; Comparative Fix Index=0.988; Tucker-Lewis Index=0.980; Root Mean Square Error of Approximation=0.076) and a graded response model (GRM) supported item fit of 40 Pain Interference items. Items did not exhibit differential item functioning or local item dependence. GRM calibration data were used to inform the selection of a 10-item static short form and to program a TBI-QOL Pain Interference CAT. Comparative analyses indicated excellent comparability and reliability across test administration formats. CONCLUSION: The 40-item TBI-QOL Pain Interference item bank demonstrated strong psychometric properties. End users can administer this measure as either a 10-item short form or CAT.

Utility of the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory in people with spinal cord injury.

STUDY DESIGN: Cohort/psychometric study OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to determine the psychometric properties and the utility of the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) in subgrouping people with moderate to severe neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury (SCI). SETTING: University-based laboratory in Miami, FL USA. METHODS: Seventy-two people with chronic SCI and neuropathic pain were included in this study. The NPSI, Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), Multidimensional Pain Inventory pain severity and perceived support subscales (MPI-PS and MPI-S, respectively), and the Coping Strategies Questionnaire were administered. The NPSI was administered twice, with a 2-4-week period between measurement sessions. RESULTS: The NPSI total score demonstrated good internal consistency with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.70. The test-retest reliability (intraclass correlations) ranged from 0.65 to 0.73 for the NPSI subscores and 0.79 for the total NPSI score. Further, construct validity was supported by moderate and significant positive correlations with the pain intensity NRS and pain severity subscale of the MPI (MPI-PS) (r > 0.40). Cluster analysis of factor scores derived from NPSI subscales, NRS, and MPI-PS scores revealed three distinct subgroups: (1) low-moderate, (2) moderate, and (3) high pain symptom severity with mean NPSI sum scores of 7.1, 17.5, and 33.8, respectively. CONCLUSION: The NPSI demonstrated good psychometric properties in people with neuropathic pain after SCI. Moreover, it has utility for establishing pain symptom phenotypes.

Cross-cultural adaptation of the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool - Youth Thai version.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to translate the original version of the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAITY) into a Thai version by using cross-cultural adaptation, and to examine the psychometric properties and cut-off score of the CAITY - Thai version (CAITY-T). METHODS: Six cross-cultural adaptation steps were used to translate and validate the psychometric properties with 267 participants, 140 with chronic ankle instability (CAI) and 127 without CAI. Their mean age was 12.3 ± 2.42 years. Validation was carried out for internal consistency and concurrent validity against a visual analog scale for global perceived ankle instability, and for discriminant validity (receiver operating characteristic curve). The CAITY-T was completed twice by 133 volunteer children (49.62%) for test-retest reliability. The cut-off score was determined using Youden's index. RESULTS: The CAITY was successfully adapted for the Thai language. Validation showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.767) and concurrent validity (Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.8 right ankle and 0.784 left ankle). The test-retest reliability was substantial with an intraclass correlation coefficient (2,1) of 0.865 (95% Confidence Interval = 0.809-0.904). The receiver operating characteristic curve and Youden's index showed the cut-off score that discriminated between children with and without CAI on the CAITY-T at ≤25. The CAITY-T obtained 95.2% sensitivity, 97% specificity, 0.05 negative, and 32 positive likelihood ratios. CONCLUSION: The CAITY-T was valid and available for Thai children aged 8-16 years. It displayed positive reliability, good validity, and an acceptable cut-off score. The cut-off score for children had high sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios.