RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Pain assessment in critically ill patients who are intubated, sedated, and unable to verbalize their needs remains a challenge. No universally accepted pain assessment tool is used in all intensive care units. OBJECTIVES: To examine concurrent validation of scores on the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool for a painful and a non-painful procedure and to examine interrater reliability of the scores between 2 nurse raters. METHODS: A prospective, repeated-measures within-subject design was used. A convenience sample of 35 patients was recruited to achieve enrollment of 30 patients during a 5-month period. Observational data were collected on patients intubated after cardiac surgery during routine turning and during dressing changes for central catheters. RESULTS: Raters' mean scores did not increase significantly during dressing changes (increase, +0.25; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.57; P = .12) but did increase significantly during turning (increase, +3.04; 95% CI 2.11-3.98; P < .001). The degree to which mean scores increased was significantly greater during turning than during dressing changes (increase, +2.80; 95% CI, 1.84-3.75; P < .001). The Fleiss-Cohen weighted κ for the inter-rater reliability of the ratings of research nurses was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.79-0.94). CONCLUSION: The results support previous research investigations on validity and reliability of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool for evaluating pain in intubated, critically ill adults.
