PROMIS 疼痛干扰量表优于 Likert 疼痛量表，可用于评估脊柱患者的疼痛。
PROMIS Pain Interference Is Superior to the Likert Pain Scale for Pain Assessment in Spine Patients.
机构信息
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.
出版信息
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019 Jul 15;44(14):E852-E856. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002979.
STUDY DESIGN
Cross-sectional cohort analysis.
OBJECTIVE
(1) To assess the correlation between Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) and pain interference (PI) in patients seeking spine care; (2) to assess the correlation between PROMIS PF and the Likert Pain Scale (LPS) in patients seeking spine care; (3) to determine which pain scale best correlates to physical function overall and by number of clinic visits.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA
An accurate understanding of a patient's pain level is beneficial in setting clinical and pain management expectations. There is limited work analyzing which instrument best captures pain and its impact on function in patients seeking spine care.
METHODS
Spine center patients from February 2015 to November 2017 were asked to complete PROMIS PF and PI domains, as well as to report their pain level on a 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain) LPS at each visit. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated between PROMIS PF and PROMIS PI; PROMIS PI and LPS; and PROMIS PF and LPS. Fisher r-z transformation method was utilized for confidence intervals (CIs) and to determine significant correlation differences. Analyses were performed for all data, as well as by office visit. Significance was set at P < 0.01.
RESULTS
A total of 21,774 first visit, 11,130 second visit, 6575 third visit, 4202 fourth visit, and 2819 fifth visit patients' data were recorded. PROMIS PF demonstrated a moderate correlation with the LPS over all visits (r = 0.46-0.49, P < 0.01). PROMIS PF demonstrated a strong correlation with PROMIS PI over all visits (r = 0.73-0.77, P < 0.01). Overall, PROMIS PI demonstrated significantly better correlation to self-reported physical function than the LPS (P < 0.01).
CONCLUSION
While PROMIS PI and the LPS both demonstrated significant correlation with self-reported physical function, PROMIS PI had a significantly stronger correlation.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
研究设计
横断面队列分析。
目的
（1）评估寻求脊柱护理的患者中患者报告的结局测量信息系统（PROMIS）身体功能（PF）和疼痛干扰（PI）之间的相关性；（2）评估寻求脊柱护理的患者中 PROMIS PF 与 Likert 疼痛量表（LPS）之间的相关性；（3）确定哪种疼痛量表与身体功能总体以及就诊次数的相关性最佳。
背景资料概要
准确了解患者的疼痛程度有助于设定临床和疼痛管理预期。在分析哪种仪器最能捕捉到寻求脊柱护理的患者的疼痛及其对功能的影响方面，相关工作有限。
方法
2015 年 2 月至 2017 年 11 月，脊柱中心的患者被要求完成 PROMIS PF 和 PI 领域，并在每次就诊时报告其 0（无疼痛）至 10（最痛）的 LPS 疼痛程度。计算了 PROMIS PF 与 PROMIS PI 之间、PROMIS PI 与 LPS 之间以及 PROMIS PF 与 LPS 之间的 Pearson 相关系数。Fisher r-z 变换法用于置信区间（CI）和确定显著相关差异。对所有数据以及就诊次数进行了分析。设定显著性水平为 P < 0.01。
结果
共记录了 21774 名首次就诊、11130 名第二次就诊、6575 名第三次就诊、4202 名第四次就诊和 2819 名第五次就诊患者的数据。PROMIS PF 在所有就诊中与 LPS 均呈中度相关（r = 0.46-0.49，P < 0.01）。PROMIS PF 在所有就诊中与 PROMIS PI 均呈强相关（r = 0.73-0.77，P < 0.01）。总体而言，PROMIS PI 与自我报告的身体功能相关性明显优于 LPS（P < 0.01）。
结论
虽然 PROMIS PI 和 LPS 均与自我报告的身体功能显著相关，但 PROMIS PI 的相关性更强。
证据水平
2 级。
Zotero 插件