Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2018 Oct;27(19-20):3522-3529.
doi: 10.1111/jocn.14585. Epub 2018 Jul 27.

Evaluation of three pain assessment scales used for ventilated neonates

Affiliations
Observational Study

Evaluation of three pain assessment scales used for ventilated neonates

Xiao-Zhi Huang et al. J Clin Nurs. 2018 Oct.

Abstract

Aims and objectives: To compare and evaluate the reliability, validity, feasibility, clinical utility, and nurses' preference of the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised, the Neonatal Pain, Agitation, and Sedation Scale, and the Neonatal Infant Acute Pain Assessment Scale used for procedural pain in ventilated neonates.

Background: Procedural pain is a common phenomenon but is undermanaged and underassessed in hospitalised neonates. Information for clinician selecting pain measurements to improve neonatal care and outcomes is still limited.

Design: A prospective observational study was used.

Methods: A total of 1,080 pain assessments were made at 90 neonates by two nurses independently, using three scales viewing three phases of videotaped painful (arterial blood sampling) and nonpainful procedures (diaper change). Internal consistency, inter-rater reliability, discriminant validity, concurrent validity and convergent validity of scales were analysed. Feasibility, clinical utility and nurses' preference of scales were also investigated.

Results: All three scales showed excellent inter-rater coefficients (from 0.991-0.992) and good internal consistency (0.733 for the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised, 0.837 for the Neonatal Pain, Agitation, and Sedation Scale and 0.836 for the Neonatal Infant Acute Pain Assessment Scale, respectively). Scores of painful and nonpainful procedures on the three scales changed significantly across the phases. There was a strong correlation between the three scales with adequate limits of agreement. The mean scores of the Neonatal Pain, Agitation, and Sedation Scale for feasibility and utility were significantly higher than those of the Neonatal Infant Acute Pain Assessment Scale, but not significantly higher than those of the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised. The Neonatal Pain, Agitation, and Sedation Scale was mostly preferred by 55.9% of the nurses, followed by the Neonatal Infant Acute Pain Assessment Scale (23.5%) and the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (20.6%).

Conclusions: The three scales are all reliable and valid, but the Neonatal Pain, Agitation, and Sedation Scale and the Neonatal Infant Acute Pain Assessment Scale perform better in reliability. The Neonatal Pain, Agitation, and Sedation Scale appears to be a better choice for frontier nurses to assess procedural pain in ventilated neonates based on its good feasibility, utility and nurses' preference.

Relevance to clinical practice: Choosing a valid, reliable, feasible and practical measurement is the key step for better management of procedural pain for ventilated newborns. Using the right and suitable tool is helpful to accurately identify pain, ultimately improve the neonatal care and outcomes.

Keywords: Neonatal Infant Acute Pain Assessment Scale; Neonatal Pain, Agitation, and Sedation Scale; Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised; assessment; measurement; mechanical ventilation; neonate; pain.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources