Pautex Sophie, Herrmann François, Le Lous Paulette, Fabjan Malika, Michel Jean-Pierre, Gold Gabriel
Department of Geriatrics, Geneva University Hospitals, Switzerland.
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2005 Apr;60(4):524-9. doi: 10.1093/gerona/60.4.524.
Acute and chronic pain is common in hospitalized demented elderly people, yet there are limited data about the performance of pain assessment tools in this population. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and reliability of four pain self-assessment scales in this population and compare their performance to an observational pain rating scale.
Our prospective clinical study was conducted in an acute-care and intermediate-care geriatric hospital on 160 consecutive inpatient referrals to the dementia consultation who met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV criteria for dementia. Exclusion criteria were delirium, terminal care, and severe sensory impairment. Four unidimensional self-assessment tools--the verbal, horizontal visual, vertical visual, and faces pain scales--were administered in randomized order to mild, moderate, and severely demented patients. An observational pain rating scale was independently completed by the nursing team.
Only 12% of the 160 patients (mean age 85 years, 71% women) understood no scale. Respectively, 97%, 90%, and 40% of patients with mild, moderate, and severe dementia understood at least one scale (p <.05). There was a nonsignificant trend toward poorer comprehension of the faces scale. Test-retest reliability was high for all four self-assessment scales, and the correlation between these scales was very strong (Spearman's r(s) = 0.81-0.95; p <.001). Observational rating correlated moderately with self-assessment and tended to underestimate pain intensity (r(s) = 0.31-0.40; p <.05).
Self-assessment pain scales can be used reliably in the vast majority of older hospitalized patients with mild to moderate dementia and in nearly half of those with severe dementia. Observational pain rating scales correlate only moderately with self-assessment and should be reserved for those few patients who have demonstrated that they cannot complete a self-assessment.
急慢性疼痛在住院的老年痴呆患者中很常见,但关于该人群疼痛评估工具性能的数据有限。本研究的目的是评估四种疼痛自评量表在该人群中的可行性和可靠性,并将它们的性能与一种观察性疼痛评定量表进行比较。
我们的前瞻性临床研究在一家急症护理和中级护理老年医院进行,对160例连续转诊至痴呆症咨询门诊且符合《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第四版痴呆症标准的住院患者进行研究。排除标准为谵妄、临终关怀和严重感觉障碍。对轻度、中度和重度痴呆患者随机顺序使用四种单维度自评工具——语言量表、水平视觉量表、垂直视觉量表和面部疼痛量表。护理团队独立完成一份观察性疼痛评定量表。
160例患者(平均年龄85岁,71%为女性)中只有12%对任何量表都不理解。轻度、中度和重度痴呆患者分别有97%、90%和40%至少理解一种量表(p<.05)。对面部量表理解较差有不显著的趋势。所有四种自评量表的重测信度都很高,这些量表之间的相关性非常强(斯皮尔曼r(s)=0.81 - 0.95;p<.001)。观察性评定与自评呈中度相关,且倾向于低估疼痛强度(r(s)=0.31 - 0.40;p<.05)。
自评疼痛量表可可靠地用于绝大多数轻度至中度痴呆的老年住院患者以及近一半的重度痴呆患者。观察性疼痛评定量表与自评仅呈中度相关,应仅用于那些已证明无法完成自评的少数患者。