Department of Population Health and Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University (NCSU), Raleigh, 27607, USA.
Anesthesiology Graduation Program, Medical School, São Paulo State University (Unesp), Botucatu, 18618-687, Brazil.
Sci Rep. 2023 Oct 31;13(1):18680. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-45869-8.
We aimed to compare two assessment methodologies (real-time vs. video-recorded) using the Unesp-Botucatu Pig Composite Acute Pain Scale (UPAPS) in piglets before and after castration. Twenty-nine male piglets were castrated. Four observers scored the UPAPS over three perioperative timepoints of castration following two assessment methodologies. In real-time assessments, the observers were in-person observing the piglets in front of the pen. After two weeks, the observers did video-recorded assessments randomizing piglets and timepoints. Modeling was conducted to compare the UPAPS and each pain-altered behavior between methodologies. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman, and Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were conducted to investigate agreement between methodologies. UPAPS was statistically equivalent between methodologies (P = 0.4371). The ICC for each method was very good (0.85 to 0.91). The agreement of the UPAPS assessed between methodologies had minimal bias (- 0.04), no proportion bias, and 53% of the assessments presented a perfect agreement. However, CCC of the UPAPS was moderate (0.65), and only one pain-altered behavior ("presents difficulty in overcoming obstacles or other animals") occurred more in real-time assessments (P = 0.0444). In conclusion, piglet pain assessment by UPAPS can be conducted in real-time based on a suitable agreement between the real-time and video-recorded assessment methods.
我们旨在比较两种评估方法(实时与视频记录),使用 Unesp-Botucatu 仔猪综合急性疼痛量表(UPAPS),评估去势前后仔猪的疼痛。29 头公仔猪接受了去势手术。四名观察者在两种评估方法下,对去势术前三个人工评分时间点的 UPAPS 进行评分。在实时评估中,观察者在猪圈前进行现场观察。两周后,观察者对仔猪和时间点进行随机视频记录评估。对模型进行比较,以评估两种方法之间的 UPAPS 和每个疼痛改变行为。采用组内相关系数(ICC)、Bland-Altman 和 Lin 的一致性相关系数(CCC)来评估两种方法之间的一致性。两种方法的 UPAPS 评分统计学上无差异(P = 0.4371)。两种方法的 ICC 均为非常好(0.85 至 0.91)。两种方法评估的 UPAPS 之间具有最小偏差(- 0.04),无比例偏差,53%的评估具有完美一致性。然而,UPAPS 的 CCC 为中度(0.65),且只有一种疼痛改变行为(“在克服障碍物或其他动物方面存在困难”)在实时评估中更为常见(P = 0.0444)。总之,基于实时和视频记录评估方法之间具有适当的一致性,使用 UPAPS 对仔猪疼痛进行评估可以实时进行。