Kaasalainen Sharon, Akhtar-Danesh Noori, Hadjistavropoulos Thomas, Zwakhalen Sandra, Verreault Rene
School of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario.
School of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario; Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario.
Pain Manag Nurs. 2013 Dec;14(4):e106-e114. doi: 10.1016/j.pmn.2011.08.006. Epub 2012 Jan 9.
The purpose of this study was twofold: (1) to evaluate four pain assessment tools for use with long-term care (LTC) residents who were both able and not able to verbally report their pain; and (2) to assess whether pain behaviors displayed by LTC residents vary as a function of ability to self-report pain. We examined the differences between these two groups of residents in terms of specific pain behaviors assessed through the Pain Assessment Checklist for Seniors with Limited Ability to Communicate (PACSLAC) and Pain Assessment in the Communicatively Impaired (PACI). We also examined the interrater reliability, and concurrent and construct validity of these two behavioral observation tools and the concurrent and construct validity of the two verbal report tools. Data were collected from a convenience sample of 338 residents from six LTC homes. The interrater reliabilities for the two behavioral observation tools were good, and concurrent validity was supported for all four pain assessment tools. Pain behaviors, as assessed by the PACSLAC and PACI, varied as a function of resident ability to verbally report pain. Residents with inability to self-report pain are more nonverbally responsive, although certain behaviors (such as guarding and touching the affected area) are seen more frequently in those capable of self-report. Our data also provide psychometric support for the assessment methods used in this study.
(1)评估四种疼痛评估工具,用于能够和不能口头报告疼痛的长期护理(LTC)居民;(2)评估LTC居民表现出的疼痛行为是否因自我报告疼痛的能力而异。我们通过《沟通能力有限的老年人疼痛评估清单》(PACSLAC)和《沟通障碍者疼痛评估》(PACI)评估的特定疼痛行为,研究了这两组居民之间的差异。我们还检验了这两种行为观察工具的评分者间信度、同时效度和结构效度,以及两种口头报告工具的同时效度和结构效度。数据来自六个LTC机构的338名居民的便利样本。两种行为观察工具的评分者间信度良好,所有四种疼痛评估工具的同时效度均得到支持。通过PACSLAC和PACI评估的疼痛行为因居民口头报告疼痛的能力而异。无法自我报告疼痛的居民更多地通过非语言方式做出反应,尽管某些行为(如保护和触摸受影响区域)在能够自我报告的居民中更常见。我们的数据也为本研究中使用的评估方法提供了心理测量学支持。