The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea.
J Clin Nurs. 2020 Aug;29(15-16):2945-2952. doi: 10.1111/jocn.15341. Epub 2020 Jun 9.
To evaluate the psychometric quality of two single-item pain-intensity measures: the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and the Verbal Rating Scale (VRS).
Measuring pain intensity is a vital step in initiating symptom management and evaluating the effectiveness of interventions with cancer patients. Single-item pain-intensity measures of the NRS and VRS format have been evaluated to be acceptable for use in clinical practice and research; however, evidence to choose one over the other, as a standardised pain-assessment format, is insufficient.
Descriptive correlational study. The study was guided and reported following the STROBE guideline.
Data accrued at two time points during cancer treatment with a total of 249 patients treated in a Korean University Hospital. Two single-item measures were constructed to assess pain intensity over 1 week. The Brief Pain Inventory (BPI; pain intensity subscale and interference subscale) and the functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-fatigue were the criterion. Convergent and concurrent validity were tested with Pearson's correlations.
In the convergent-validity evaluation of the cross-sectional association with the BPI, the NRS showed a much higher level of association than the VRS (0.81 versus 0.61). In convergent validity with a longitudinal association with the BPI, the NRS score change had a much higher level of association (0.61 versus 0.37). In concurrent-validity evaluation, the NRS and VRS showed similar levels of associations with fatigue (-0.48 versus -0.49). Yet, the NRS showed statistically higher levels of correlation with functional limitations than the VRS (0.55 versus 0.42), comparable to the concurrent validity of the BPI.
The NRS showed higher validity than VRS when assessing overall pain intensity over the past week.
Pain assessment is a vital role of nurses in caring for patients with cancer. Current study findings support the use of the single-item NRS pain measure to assess global pain intensity over the past week.
评估两种单项疼痛强度测量方法的心理测量质量：数字评分量表（NRS）和言语评分量表（VRS）。
测量疼痛强度是启动症状管理和评估癌症患者干预措施有效性的重要步骤。NRS 和 VRS 格式的单项疼痛强度测量方法已被评估为可在临床实践和研究中使用；然而，作为一种标准化的疼痛评估格式，选择一种方法而不是另一种方法的证据还不够充分。
描述性相关性研究。该研究遵循 STROBE 指南进行指导和报告。
在癌症治疗的两个时间点收集数据，共有 249 名在韩国大学医院接受治疗的患者。构建了两种单项测量方法来评估过去 1 周的疼痛强度。BPI（疼痛强度子量表和干扰子量表）和慢性疾病治疗-疲劳的功能评估是标准。使用 Pearson 相关系数测试了收敛和同时效度。
在与 BPI 的横断面关联的收敛有效性评估中，NRS 显示出比 VRS 更高的关联水平（0.81 比 0.61）。在与 BPI 的纵向关联的收敛有效性中，NRS 评分变化的关联水平更高（0.61 比 0.37）。在同时有效性评估中，NRS 和 VRS 与疲劳的关联水平相似（-0.48 比-0.49）。然而，NRS 与功能限制的相关性比 VRS 更高（0.55 比 0.42），与 BPI 的同时有效性相当。
在评估过去一周的总体疼痛强度时，NRS 比 VRS 具有更高的有效性。
疼痛评估是护士在照顾癌症患者中的重要角色。本研究结果支持使用单项 NRS 疼痛测量来评估过去一周的整体疼痛强度。
