Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften E-learning Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
UITGEBREID ZOEKEN
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 3/2018

22-12-2017

Psychometric evaluation of the PainCAS Interference with Daily Activities, Psychological/Emotional Distress, and Pain scales

Auteurs: Stacey A. McCaffrey, Ryan A. Black, Stephen F. Butler, Inflexxion, Inc.

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 3/2018

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

The PainCAS is a web-based clinical tool for assessing and tracking pain and opioid risk in chronic pain patients. Despite evidence for its utility within the clinical setting, the PainCAS scales have never been subject to psychometric evaluation. The current study is the first to evaluate the psychometric properties of the PainCAS Interference with Daily Activities, Psychological/Emotional Distress, and Pain scales.

Methods

Patients (N = 4797) from treatment centers and hospitals in 16 different states completed the PainCAS as part of routine clinical assessment. A subsample (n = 73) from two hospital-based treatment centers also completed comparator measures. Rasch Rating Scale Models were employed to evaluate the Interference with Daily Activities and Psychological/Emotional Distress scales, and empirical evaluation included assessment of dimensionality, discrimination, item fit, reliability, information, and person-to-item targeting. Additionally, convergent and discriminant validity were evaluated through classical test theory approaches. Convergent validity of the Pain scales was evaluated through correlations with corresponding comparator items.

Results

One Interference with Daily Activities item was removed due to poor functioning and discrimination. The retained items from the Interference with Daily Activities and Psychological/Emotional Distress scales conformed to unidimensional Rasch measurement models, yielding satisfactory item fit, reliability, precision, and coverage. Further, results provided support for the convergent and discriminant validity of these two scales. Convergent validity between the PainCAS Pain and BPI Pain items was also strong.

Conclusion

Taken together, results provide strong psychometric support for these PainCAS Pain scales. Strengths and limitations of the current study are discussed.
vorige artikel Development of a practical outcome measure to account for individual differences in quality-of-life appraisal: the Brief Appraisal Inventory
Voetnoten
1
Of note, this comparison could also be viewed as evidence of alternate forms of reliability as the PainCAS Pain scales are highly similar in content to the BPI Pain items.
 
2
Item discrimination was estimated outside of the Rasch model.
 
3
It should be noted that given the fact that this sample of chronic pain patients is older (i.e., > 50 years), pain interfering with childcare may be less of an issue than it would be for a younger population.
 
4
Note that thereare a 0.985 and a 0.994 correlation between the raw interference and distress scores and their Rasch scores. Therefore, for ease of calculating total scores, raw scores are used instead of Rasch.
 
Literatuur
1.
Butler, S. F., et al. (2016). Impact of an electronic pain and opioid risk assessment program: Are there improvements in patient encounters and clinic notes? Pain Medicine, 17(11), 2047–2060.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zacharoff, K., Butler, S. F., Jamison, R., Budman, S., Charity, S., & Yiu, E. (2010). Development of the pain assessment interview network-clinical advisory system (painCAS), a systematic computer-administered assessment of chronic pain patients. The Journal of Pain, 11(4), S3.CrossRef
3.
Butler, S. F., Fernandez, K., Benoit, C., Budman, S. H., & Jamison, R. N. (2008). Validation of the revised screener and opioid assessment for patients with pain (SOAPP-R). The Journal of Pain, 9(4), 360–372.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
5.
Butler, S. F., Zacharoff, K., Charity, S., Lawler, K., & Jamison, R. N. (2014). Electronic opioid risk assessment program for chronic pain patients: Barriers and benefits of implementation. Pain Practice, 14, E98–E105.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Bond, T., & Fox, C. (2015). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
7.
Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists (4th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
8.
Cleeland, C. S., & Ryan, K. M. (1994). Pain assessment: Global use of the brief pain inventory. Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore, 23(0304–4602), 129–138.PubMed
9.
McNair, D., Lorr, M., & Droppleman, L. (1971). Manual for the profile of mood states. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.
10.
Haythornthwaite, J. A., & Edwards, R. R. (2007). Profile of mood states (POMS), Presented at the fourth meeting of the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials.
11.
Andrich, D. (1978). Application of a psychometric model to ordered categories which are scored with successive integers. Applied Psychological Measurement, 2(4), 581–594.CrossRef
12.
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
13.
14.
IBM Corp. (2013). IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 22.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
15.
Reckase, M. (1979). Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Results and implications. Journal of Educational Statistics, 4, 207–230.CrossRef
16.
Linacre, J. M. (2000). Item discrimination and infit mean-squares. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 14(2), 743.
17.
Smith, R. M. (1996). Polytomous mean-square fit statistics. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 10(3), 516–517.
18.
Linacre, J. M. (2017). Winsteps® Rasch measurement computer program user’s guide. Beaverton: Winsteps.com.
19.
Metagegevens
Titel
Psychometric evaluation of the PainCAS Interference with Daily Activities, Psychological/Emotional Distress, and Pain scales
Auteurs
Stacey A. McCaffrey
Ryan A. Black
Stephen F. Butler
Inflexxion, Inc.
Publicatiedatum
22-12-2017
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 3/2018
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1766-3

Andere artikelen Uitgave 3/2018

Quality of Life Research 3/2018 Naar de uitgave

OriginalPaper

Quality of life at 6 years after occupational injury

OriginalPaper

Comparing and transforming PROMIS utility values to the EQ-5D

OriginalPaper

Association of generic health-related quality of life (EQ-5D dimensions) and inactivity with lung function in lung-healthy German adults: results from the KORA studies F4L and Age

OriginalPaper

The association between somatic and psychological discomfort and health-related quality of life according to the elderly and non-elderly

OriginalPaper

Health-related quality of life and recovery patterns among hospitalised injury patients in Vietnam

OriginalPaper

Evaluating cognition in individuals with Huntington disease: Neuro-QoL cognitive functioning measures