Von Korff Michael, DeBar Lynn L, Deyo Richard A, Mayhew Meghan, Kerns Robert D, Goulet Joseph L, Brandt Cynthia
Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington.
Department of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Pain Med. 2020 Dec 25;21(12):3387-3392. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnaa295.
Multisite chronic pain (MSCP) is associated with increased chronic pain impact, but methods for identifying MSCP for epidemiological research have not been evaluated.
We assessed the validity of identifying MSCP using electronic health care data compared with survey questionnaires.
Stratified random samples of adults served by Kaiser Permanente Northwest and Washington (N = 2,059) were drawn for a survey, oversampling persons with frequent use of health care for pain. MSCP and single-site chronic pain were identified by two methods, with electronic health care data and with self-report of common chronic pain conditions by survey questionnaire. Analyses were weighted to adjust for stratified sampling.
MSCP was somewhat less common when ascertained by electronic health records (14.7% weighted prevalence) than by survey questionnaire (25.9% weighted prevalence). Agreement of the two MSCP classifications was low (kappa agreement statistic of 0.21). Ascertainment of MSCP with electronic health records was 30.9% sensitive, 91.0% specific, and had a positive predictive value of 54.5% relative to MSCP identified by self-report as the standard. After adjusting for age and gender, patients with MSCP identified by either electronic health records or self-report showed higher levels of pain-related disability, pain severity, depressive symptoms, and long-term opioid use than persons with single-site chronic pain identified by the same method.
Identification of MSCP with electronic health care data was insufficiently accurate to be used as a surrogate or screener for MSCP identified by self-report, but both methods identified persons with heightened chronic pain impact.
多部位慢性疼痛(MSCP)与慢性疼痛影响的增加相关,但尚未对用于流行病学研究的MSCP识别方法进行评估。
我们评估了使用电子医疗数据与调查问卷相比识别MSCP的有效性。
抽取了西北凯撒医疗集团和华盛顿地区服务的成年人分层随机样本(N = 2059)进行调查,对频繁因疼痛就医的人群进行了过度抽样。通过两种方法识别MSCP和单部位慢性疼痛,一种是使用电子医疗数据,另一种是通过调查问卷自我报告常见的慢性疼痛状况。分析采用加权法以调整分层抽样。
通过电子健康记录确定的MSCP(加权患病率为14.7%)比通过调查问卷确定的(加权患病率为25.9%)略少见。两种MSCP分类的一致性较低(kappa一致性统计量为0.21)。以自我报告确定的MSCP为标准,通过电子健康记录确定MSCP的敏感性为30.9%,特异性为91.0%,阳性预测值为54.5%。在调整年龄和性别后,通过电子健康记录或自我报告确定为MSCP的患者,与通过相同方法确定为单部位慢性疼痛的患者相比,在疼痛相关残疾、疼痛严重程度、抑郁症状和长期使用阿片类药物方面的水平更高。
用电子医疗数据识别MSCP的准确性不足以作为自我报告确定的MSCP的替代方法或筛查工具,但两种方法都能识别出慢性疼痛影响较高的人群。