Suppr超能文献

BPI简明量表及“最严重疼痛”项目在胸膜和腹膜间皮瘤中的内容效度和电子患者报告结局的可用性

Content validity and ePRO usability of the BPI-sf and "worst pain" item with pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma.

作者信息

Gelhorn Heather L, Eremenco Sonya, Skalicky Anne M, Balantac Zaneta, Cimms Tricia, Halling Katarina, Sexton Chris

机构信息

Evidera - Evidence, Value & Access by PPD, 7101 Wisconsin Ave, Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD 20814 USA.

2AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD USA.

出版信息

J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2017;2(1):16. doi: 10.1186/s41687-018-0039-4. Epub 2018 Mar 27.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Brief Pain Inventory-short form (BPI-sf) is widely used in self-reported pain assessment, incorporates pain numeric rating scales (NRS) and is commonly utilized in electronic format in clinical trials, however, there is no published information about its usability as an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) measure. The objective of this qualitative study was threefold: 1) to better understand pain experiences among patients with pleural or peritoneal mesothelioma; 2) to assess the interpretability of the instructions, item stem, recall period, and response option of the "worst pain" item of the BPI-sf; and 3) to examine the usability of the TrialMax Touch™ (CRF Health, Inc., Plymouth Meeting, PA) screen-based handheld device and the electronic format of the BPI-sf in a sub-sample of pleural mesothelioma patients.

METHODS

A cross-sectional qualitative study was conducted among participants with pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma recruited from 4 clinical sites in the US. Semi-structured telephone or in-person interviews were conducted consisting of concept elicitation, cognitive interviewing of the 11-item BPI-sf, and in-person interview evaluation of ePRO assessment usability in pleural mesothelioma patients.

RESULTS

Twenty-one participants recruited from 4 clinical sites in the US were interviewed in-person ( = 9) and by telephone ( = 12); 71% male; mean age 68.7 ± 13.6 years. Pleural and peritoneal patients described pain as ranging from discomfort to intense pain and reported being able to distinguish tumor pain from treatment pain. The BPI-sf "worst pain" item was relevant to, and easily understood by, study participants with pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma. The ePRO version was found to be easy to use, but readability of small font may be an issue. Participants reported minimal differences between their responses on the paper and ePRO version for all of the pain severity and pain interference items.

CONCLUSIONS

Results support the relevance and ease of understanding of the "worst pain" item and provide support for its content validity in patients with pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma. Usability of the ePRO format of the BPI-sf was confirmed for use in clinical trials among patients with pleural mesothelioma.

摘要

背景

简明疼痛问卷简表(BPI-sf)广泛用于自我报告的疼痛评估,纳入了疼痛数字评定量表(NRS),并在临床试验中普遍以电子形式使用,然而,尚无关于其作为电子患者报告结局(ePRO)指标的可用性的公开信息。这项定性研究的目的有三个:1)更好地了解胸膜或腹膜间皮瘤患者的疼痛经历;2)评估BPI-sf“最严重疼痛”项目的说明、项目主干、回忆期和回答选项的可解释性;3)在胸膜间皮瘤患者的一个子样本中检查TrialMax Touch™(CRF Health公司,宾夕法尼亚州普利茅斯会议)基于屏幕的手持设备和BPI-sf电子形式的可用性。

方法

在美国4个临床地点招募胸膜和腹膜间皮瘤参与者进行横断面定性研究。进行了半结构化电话访谈或面对面访谈,包括概念引出、对11项BPI-sf的认知访谈,以及对胸膜间皮瘤患者ePRO评估可用性的面对面访谈评估。

结果

在美国4个临床地点招募的21名参与者接受了面对面访谈(n = 9)和电话访谈(n = 12);71%为男性;平均年龄68.7±13.6岁。胸膜和腹膜患者将疼痛描述为从不适到剧痛,并报告能够区分肿瘤疼痛和治疗疼痛。BPI-sf“最严重疼痛”项目与胸膜和腹膜间皮瘤研究参与者相关且易于理解。发现ePRO版本易于使用,但小字体的可读性可能是一个问题。参与者报告,在所有疼痛严重程度和疼痛干扰项目上,他们在纸质版和ePRO版本上的回答差异最小。

结论

结果支持“最严重疼痛”项目的相关性和易理解性,并为其在胸膜和腹膜间皮瘤患者中的内容效度提供了支持。BPI-sf的ePRO格式的可用性在胸膜间皮瘤患者的临床试验中得到了证实。

相似文献

1
Content validity and ePRO usability of the BPI-sf and "worst pain" item with pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma.
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2017;2(1):16. doi: 10.1186/s41687-018-0039-4. Epub 2018 Mar 27.
2
Content validity and electronic PRO (ePRO) usability of the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale-Mesothelioma (LCSS-Meso) in mesothelioma patients.
Support Care Cancer. 2018 Jul;26(7):2229-2238. doi: 10.1007/s00520-018-4061-0. Epub 2018 Feb 1.
3
Qualitative Analysis of Pain in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.
Bladder Cancer. 2022 Mar 11;8(1):45-53. doi: 10.3233/BLC-211518. eCollection 2022.
5
Pain in castration-resistant prostate cancer with bone metastases: a qualitative study.
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011 Oct 12;9:88. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-9-88.
7
Reliability and validity of the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form in individuals with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain.
Disabil Rehabil. 2025 Apr;47(7):1854-1860. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2024.2387688. Epub 2024 Aug 20.
8
Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form: A New Method for Assessing Pain in the Emergency Department.
Pain Med. 2020 Dec 25;21(12):3263-3269. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnaa269.

本文引用的文献

1
Validation of the Brief Pain Inventory in Patients With Low Back Pain.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016 Aug 1;41(15):E937-E942. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001478.
4
Comparison of self-administered survey questionnaire responses collected using mobile apps versus other methods.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jul 27;2015(7):MR000042. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000042.pub2.
8
Pain in castration-resistant prostate cancer with bone metastases: a qualitative study.
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011 Oct 12;9:88. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-9-88.
9
Global magnitude of reported and unreported mesothelioma.
Environ Health Perspect. 2011 Apr;119(4):514-8. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1002845.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验