Faculty of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Elborn College, Western University.
Roth McFarlane Hand and Upper Limb Centre, St. Joseph's Hospital, London.
Clin J Pain. 2021 Jun 1;37(6):454-474. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000933.
The objective of this study was to systematically locate, critically appraise, and summarize clinical measurement research addressing the use of Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) and Revised Short McGill Pain Questionnaire Version-2 (SF-MPQ-2) in pain-related musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions.
We systematically searched 4 databases (Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, and SCOPUS) and screened articles to identify those reporting the psychometric properties (eg, validity, reliability) and interpretability (eg, minimal clinically important difference) of BPI-SF and SF-MPQ-2 as evaluated in pain-related MSK conditions. Independently, 2 reviewers extracted data and assessed the quality of evidence with a structured quality appraisal tool and the updated COSMIN guidelines.
In all, 26 articles were included (BPI-SF, n=17; SF-MPQ-2, n=9). Both tools lack reporting on their cross-cultural validities and measurement error indices (eg, standard error of measurement). High-quality studies suggest the tools are internally consistent (α=0.83 to 0.96), and they associate modestly with similar outcomes (r=0.3 to 0.69). Strong evidence suggests the BPI-SF conforms to its 2-dimensional structure in MSK studies; the SF-MPQ-2 4-factor structure was not clearly established. Seven reports of high-to-moderate quality evidence were supportive of the BPI-SF known-group validity (n=2) and responsiveness (n=5). One report of high quality established the SF-MPQ-2 responsiveness.
Evidence of high-to-moderate quality supports the internal consistency, criterion-convergent validity, structural validity, and responsiveness of the BPI-SF and SF-MPQ-2 and establishes their use as generic multidimensional pain outcomes in MSK populations. However, more studies of high quality are still needed on their retest reliability, known-group validity, cross-cultural validity, interpretability properties, and measurement error indices in different MSK populations.
本研究旨在系统定位、批判性评价并总结针对与疼痛相关的肌肉骨骼（MSK）疾病中使用简明疼痛量表-短表（BPI-SF）和修订后的简短麦吉尔疼痛问卷版本-2（SF-MPQ-2）的临床测量研究的文献。
我们系统地检索了 4 个数据库（Medline、CINAHL、EMBASE 和 SCOPUS），筛选文章以确定报告 BPI-SF 和 SF-MPQ-2 的心理测量特性（例如，有效性、可靠性）和可解释性（例如，最小临床重要差异）的研究，这些研究在与疼痛相关的 MSK 疾病中进行了评估。两位独立的审稿人使用结构化质量评估工具和更新的 COSMIN 指南提取数据并评估证据质量。
共纳入 26 篇文章（BPI-SF，n=17；SF-MPQ-2，n=9）。这两种工具均缺乏关于其跨文化有效性和测量误差指数（例如，测量标准误差）的报告。高质量研究表明，这些工具具有内部一致性（α=0.83 至 0.96），并且与类似结果中度相关（r=0.3 至 0.69）。强有力的证据表明，BPI-SF 在 MSK 研究中符合其 2 维结构；SF-MPQ-2 的 4 因素结构尚未明确确定。7 项高质量证据的报告支持 BPI-SF 的已知组有效性（n=2）和反应性（n=5）。一项高质量的报告确立了 SF-MPQ-2 的反应性。
高质量到中等质量的证据支持 BPI-SF 和 SF-MPQ-2 的内部一致性、准则关联效度、结构效度和反应性，并确立了它们在 MSK 人群中作为通用多维疼痛结局的使用。然而，仍需要更多高质量的研究来评估它们的重测信度、已知组有效性、跨文化有效性、可解释性特征和不同 MSK 人群中的测量误差指数。
