Abahussin Asma A, West Robert M, Wong David C, Ziegler Lucy E
Leeds institute of Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, U.K.
Biomedical Technology Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Pain Pract. 2019 Jan;19(1):93-117. doi: 10.1111/papr.12711. Epub 2018 Jul 4.
Pain is one of the most devastating symptoms for cancer patients. One third of patients who experience pain do not receive effective treatment. A key barrier to effective pain management is lack of routine measurement and monitoring of pain. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are recommended for measuring cancer pain. However, evidence to guide the selection of the most appropriate measure to identify and monitor cancer pain is limited. A systematic review of measurement properties of PROMs for pain in cancer patients is needed to identify the best validated measure for adoption to an electronic platform.
To systematically review measurement properties of PROMs used for adult cancer patients to measure pain and, as a secondary goal, to investigate the evidence of validated mobile health (mHealth) applications used to measure pain (registration number: CRD42017065575).
Medline, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were systematically searched in March 2018 for studies examining measurement properties for PROMs for pain in adult cancer patients. The methodological quality of the studies and their results were appraised using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist and specific measurement properties criteria, respectively.
Sixteen studies evaluating 8 instruments were included. No studies using a PROM in an mHealth application were identified. The methodological quality of the measurement properties ranged between poor and fair. No instrument showed strong positive evidence for all the evaluated measurement properties. Based on the available evidence, the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) had the strongest evidence to support its selection for the measurement of cancer pain.
The BPI-SF was the best performing measure across all properties evaluated through COSMIN. Better quality validation studies of PROMs for cancer pain are needed to explore the full range of measurement properties. Utilizing mHealth applications to measure pain in cancer patients is an innovative approach worthy of further investigation.
疼痛是癌症患者最具破坏性的症状之一。有三分之一经历疼痛的患者未得到有效治疗。有效疼痛管理的一个关键障碍是缺乏对疼痛的常规测量和监测。推荐使用患者报告结局测量指标(PROMs)来测量癌症疼痛。然而,指导选择最合适的指标以识别和监测癌症疼痛的证据有限。需要对用于癌症患者疼痛的PROMs测量特性进行系统评价,以确定最有效的指标用于电子平台。
系统评价用于成年癌症患者测量疼痛的PROMs的测量特性,并作为次要目标,调查用于测量疼痛的经过验证的移动健康(mHealth)应用程序的证据(注册号:CRD42017065575)。
2018年3月对Medline、Embase和护理及联合健康文献累积索引(CINAHL)进行系统检索,以查找关于成年癌症患者疼痛的PROMs测量特性的研究。分别使用基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准(COSMIN)清单和特定测量特性标准对研究的方法学质量及其结果进行评价。
纳入了16项评估8种工具的研究。未发现使用mHealth应用程序中的PROMs的研究。测量特性的方法学质量介于差和一般之间。没有一种工具在所有评估的测量特性上都显示出强有力的阳性证据。基于现有证据,简明疼痛问卷简表(BPI-SF)有最有力的证据支持其用于测量癌症疼痛的选择。
通过COSMIN评估,BPI-SF在所有特性方面表现最佳。需要对用于癌症疼痛的PROMs进行质量更高的验证研究,以探索测量特性的全部范围。利用mHealth应用程序测量癌症患者的疼痛是一种值得进一步研究的创新方法。