• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

疼痛强度评估:用于认知功能正常和认知功能受损的非裔美国老年人的选定疼痛强度量表的比较

Pain intensity assessment: a comparison of selected pain intensity scales for use in cognitively intact and cognitively impaired African American older adults.

作者信息

Taylor Laurie Jowers, Herr Keela

机构信息

Department of Nursing, State University of West Georgia, 1600 Maple Street, Carrollton, GA 30118, USA.

出版信息

Pain Manag Nurs. 2003 Jun;4(2):87-95. doi: 10.1016/s1524-9042(02)54210-7.

DOI:10.1016/s1524-9042(02)54210-7
PMID:12836153
Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability and validity of selected pain intensity scales including the Faces Pain Scale (FPS), the Verbal Description Scale, the Numeric Rating Scale, and the Iowa Pain Thermometer to assess pain in cognitively impaired minority older adults. A descriptive correlational design was used, and a convenience sample of 57 volunteers age 58 and older residing in the South was recruited for this study. The sample consisted of 8 males and 49 females with a mean age of 76. Fifty-nine percent of the sample completed an 11th grade education or less, and 59% completed high school or college. Seventy-seven percent (n = 44) of the sample scored 24 or less on the mental status exam, indicating some degree of cognitive impairment. The remaining 23% (n = 13) were cognitively intact. All of the participants were able to use each of the scales to rate their pain. Concurrent validity of the scales was supported with Spearman rank correlation coefficients ranging from.74 to.83 in the cognitively impaired group and.81 to.96 in the cognitively intact group. Test-retest reliability at a 2-week interval was acceptable in the cognitively intact group (Spearman rank correlations ranged from.73 to.83) and to a lesser degree in the cognitively impaired group (correlations ranged from.52 to.79). When asked about scale preference, both the cognitively impaired and the intact group indicated a preference for the FPS. Findings from this study suggest that cognitive impairment did not inhibit older minority participants' ability to use a variety of pain intensity scales. Additionally, options should be provided that address individual needs of older adults considering specific cognitive level and disability, education, gender, ethnicity, and cultural influences concerning perceptions of the various pain intensity scales.

摘要

本研究的目的是确定所选疼痛强度量表的可靠性和有效性,这些量表包括面部疼痛量表(FPS)、言语描述量表、数字评定量表和爱荷华疼痛温度计,用于评估认知受损的老年少数族裔的疼痛情况。本研究采用描述性相关设计,招募了57名年龄在58岁及以上居住在南方的志愿者作为便利样本。样本包括8名男性和49名女性,平均年龄为76岁。59%的样本完成了11年级及以下的教育,59%完成了高中或大学教育。77%(n = 44)的样本在精神状态检查中得分24分及以下,表明存在一定程度的认知障碍。其余23%(n = 13)认知功能正常。所有参与者都能够使用每种量表对自己的疼痛进行评分。认知受损组的斯皮尔曼等级相关系数在0.74至0.83之间,认知功能正常组在0.81至0.96之间,支持了这些量表的同时效度。认知功能正常组在2周间隔的重测信度是可以接受的(斯皮尔曼等级相关系数在0.73至0.83之间),认知受损组的程度稍低(相关系数在0.52至0.79之间)。当被问及对量表的偏好时,认知受损组和认知功能正常组都表示更喜欢FPS。本研究结果表明,认知障碍并未抑制老年少数族裔参与者使用多种疼痛强度量表的能力。此外,应提供考虑到老年人具体认知水平、残疾情况、教育程度、性别、种族以及关于各种疼痛强度量表认知的文化影响等个体需求的选项。

相似文献

1
Pain intensity assessment: a comparison of selected pain intensity scales for use in cognitively intact and cognitively impaired African American older adults.疼痛强度评估:用于认知功能正常和认知功能受损的非裔美国老年人的选定疼痛强度量表的比较
Pain Manag Nurs. 2003 Jun;4(2):87-95. doi: 10.1016/s1524-9042(02)54210-7.
2
Evaluation of the Revised Faces Pain Scale, Verbal Descriptor Scale, Numeric Rating Scale, and Iowa Pain Thermometer in older minority adults.对老年少数族裔成年人中修订的面部疼痛量表、言语描述量表、数字评定量表和爱荷华疼痛温度计的评估。
Pain Manag Nurs. 2006 Sep;7(3):117-25. doi: 10.1016/j.pmn.2006.06.005.
3
Psychometric evaluation of selected pain intensity scales for use with cognitively impaired and cognitively intact older adults.针对认知受损和认知未受损的老年人,对选定的疼痛强度量表进行心理测量评估。
Rehabil Nurs. 2005 Mar-Apr;30(2):55-61. doi: 10.1002/j.2048-7940.2005.tb00360.x.
4
Reliability and validity of the Faces Pain Scale with older adults.老年人面部疼痛量表的信度和效度
Int J Nurs Stud. 2006 May;43(4):447-56. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.01.001. Epub 2006 Feb 28.
5
Postoperative pain assessment with three intensity scales in Chinese elders.采用三种疼痛强度量表对中国老年人进行术后疼痛评估。
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2009;41(3):241-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2009.01280.x.
6
Psychometric Evaluation of the Revised Iowa Pain Thermometer (IPT-R) in a Sample of Diverse Cognitively Intact and Impaired Older Adults: A Pilot Study.修订版爱荷华疼痛温度计(IPT-R)在不同认知功能正常和受损的老年人样本中的心理测量学评估:一项初步研究。
Pain Manag Nurs. 2015 Aug;16(4):475-82. doi: 10.1016/j.pmn.2014.09.004.
7
Comparison of self-reported pain and the PAINAD scale in hospitalized cognitively impaired and intact older adults after hip fracture surgery.髋部骨折手术后住院的认知受损和认知未受损老年人自我报告疼痛与PAINAD量表的比较。
Orthop Nurs. 2008 Jan-Feb;27(1):21-8. doi: 10.1097/01.NOR.0000310607.62624.74.
8
Assessment of pain in cognitively impaired older adults: a comparison of pain assessment tools and their use by nonprofessional caregivers.认知受损老年人的疼痛评估:疼痛评估工具及其由非专业护理人员使用情况的比较
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000 Dec;48(12):1607-11. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2000.tb03871.x.
9
Pain assessment in cognitively impaired and unimpaired older adults: a comparison of four scales.
Pain. 2001 May;92(1-2):173-86. doi: 10.1016/s0304-3959(00)00485-1.
10
Evaluation of reliability, validity, and preference for a pain intensity scale for use with the elderly.对一种用于老年人的疼痛强度量表的信度、效度及偏好性评估。
J Pain. 2005 Nov;6(11):727-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2005.06.005.

引用本文的文献

1
Measuring pain intensity in older patients: a comparison of five scales.测量老年患者的疼痛强度:五种量表的比较。
BMC Geriatr. 2024 Jun 25;24(1):556. doi: 10.1186/s12877-024-05127-6.
2
Beyond challenges and enrichment: a qualitative account of cross-cultural experiences of nursing patients with an ethnic minority background in Norway.超越挑战与丰富体验:对挪威少数族裔背景护理患者跨文化经历的质性描述
BMC Nurs. 2022 Nov 23;21(1):322. doi: 10.1186/s12912-022-01102-x.
3
Effectiveness of acupuncture combined with rehabilitation training vs. rehabilitation training alone for post-stroke shoulder pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
针刺联合康复训练与单纯康复训练治疗脑卒中后肩痛的疗效:一项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析
Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Oct 4;9:947285. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.947285. eCollection 2022.
4
Validity and Utility of Four Pain Intensity Measures for Use in International Research.四种疼痛强度测量方法在国际研究中的有效性和实用性。
J Pain Res. 2021 Apr 21;14:1129-1139. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S303305. eCollection 2021.
5
Validity and Reliability of 11-face Faces Pain Scale in the Iranian Elderly Community with Chronic Pain.11 面部表情疼痛量表在伊朗慢性疼痛老年社区中的效度和信度
Indian J Palliat Care. 2019 Jan-Mar;25(1):46-51. doi: 10.4103/IJPC.IJPC_126_18.
6
The utility and validity of pain intensity rating scales for use in developing countries.疼痛强度评定量表在发展中国家使用的效用和效度。
Pain Rep. 2018 Aug 6;3(5):e672. doi: 10.1097/PR9.0000000000000672. eCollection 2018 Sep-Oct.
7
Trajectory of health-related quality of life and its determinants in patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery: a 1-year longitudinal study.腰椎手术后患者健康相关生活质量的轨迹及其决定因素:一项为期 1 年的纵向研究。
Qual Life Res. 2018 Sep;27(9):2251-2259. doi: 10.1007/s11136-018-1888-2. Epub 2018 Jun 2.
8
The Assessment of Pain in Older People: UK National Guidelines.老年人疼痛评估:英国国家指南
Age Ageing. 2018 Mar 1;47(suppl_1):i1-i22. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afx192.
9
Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Nepali versions of numerical pain rating scale and global rating of change.数值疼痛评分量表和变化整体评分的尼泊尔文版本的翻译、跨文化调适和心理计量特性。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017 Dec 4;15(1):236. doi: 10.1186/s12955-017-0812-8.
10
Self-report pain assessment tools for cognitively intact older adults: Integrative review.适用于认知功能正常的老年人的自我报告疼痛评估工具:综合综述。
Int J Older People Nurs. 2018 Jun;13(2):e12170. doi: 10.1111/opn.12170. Epub 2017 Oct 5.