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
. 2021 Feb 8:2021:6695741.
doi: 10.1155/2021/6695741. eCollection 2021.

An Objective Pain Score for Chronic Pain Clinic Patients

Agnes K Pace  1   2 , Melanio Bruceta  1 , John Donovan  3 , Sonia J Vaida  1 , Jill M Eckert  2
Affiliations

An Objective Pain Score for Chronic Pain Clinic Patients

Agnes K Pace et al. Pain Res Manag. .

Abstract

Objectives: Although numerous studies have looked at the numeric rating scale (NRS) in chronic pain patients and several studies have evaluated objective pain scales, no known studies have assessed an objective pain scale for use in the evaluation of adult chronic pain patients in the outpatient setting. Subjective scales require patients to convert a subjective feeling into a quantitative number. Meanwhile, objective pain scales utilize, for the most part, the patient's behavioral component as observed by the provider in addition to the patient's subjective perception of pain. This study aims to examine the reliability and validity of an objective Chronic Pain Behavioral Pain Scale for Adults (CBPS) as compared to the traditional NRS.

Methods: In this cross-sectional study, patients were assessed before and after an interventional pain procedure by a researcher and a nurse using the CBPS and the NRS. Interrater reliability, concurrent validity, and construct validity were analyzed.

Results: Interrater reliability revealed a fair-good agreement between the nurse's and researcher's CBPS scores, weighted kappa values of 0.59 and 0.65, preprocedure and postprocedure, respectively. Concurrent validity showed low positive correlation for the preprocedure measurements, 0.34 (95% CI 0.16-0.50) and 0.47 (95% CI 0.31-0.61), and moderate positive correlation for the postprocedure measurements, 0.68 (95% CI 0.56-0.77) and 0.67 (95% CI 0.55-0.77), for the nurses and researchers, respectively. Construct validity demonstrated an equally average significant reduction in pain from preprocedure to postprocedure, CBPS and NRS median (IQR) scores preprocedure (4 (2-6) and 6 (4-8)) and postprocedure (1 (0-2) and 3 (0-5)), p < 0.001. Discussion. The CBPS has been shown to have interrater reliability, concurrent validity, and construct validity. However, further testing is needed to show its potential benefits over other pain scales and its effectiveness in treating patients with chronic pain over a long-term. This study was registered with ClinicalTrial.gov with National Clinical Trial Number NCT02882971.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Interrater reliability for CBPS scores between nurses and researchers preprocedure.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Interrater reliability for CBPS scores between nurses and researchers postprocedure.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Dansie E. J., Turk D. C. Assessment of patients with chronic pain. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2013;111(1):19–25. doi: 10.1093/bja/aet124. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Childs J. D., Piva S. R., Fritz J. M. Responsiveness of the numeric pain rating scale in patients with low back pain. Spine. 2005;30(11):1331–1334. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000164099.92112.29. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jensen M. P., McFarland C. A. Increasing the reliability and validity of pain intensity measurement in chronic pain patients. Pain. 1993;55(2):195–203. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(93)90148-i. - DOI - PubMed
    1. McCormack H. M., Horne D. J. D. L., Sheather S. Clinical applications of visual analogue scales: a critical review. Psychological Medicine. 1988;18(4):1007–1019. doi: 10.1017/s0033291700009934. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Renskers L., van Uden R. J. J. C., Huis A. M. P., Rongen S. A. A., Teerenstra S., van Riel P. L. C. M. Comparison of the construct validity and reproducibility of four different types of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Clinical Rheumatology. 2018;37(12):3191–3199. doi: 10.1007/s10067-018-4285-x. - DOI - PubMed

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources