Western journal of nursing research · 2025
Validation of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Intensity and Brief Pain Inventory During Pregnancy.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Vignato Julie, Perkhounkova Yelena, Marilim Hannah, Lee Jihye, Hein Maria, Santillan Donna, Santillan Mark
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: We sought to (1) validate the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Intensity Short Form 3a measure and Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) for assessing pain during pregnancy and (2) evaluate pain in a sample of pregnant individuals.
METHODS: Pregnant individuals (N = 196) were prospectively surveyed: n = 171 up to 22 weeks gestational age, n = 123 during their third trimester of pregnancy, and n = 98 both times. Additional measures included SPRINT Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Tool, Neurological Quality of Life, Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale and anxiety subscale, and Adverse Childhood Experiences Questionnaire. Validity evidence examined included content validity, reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, and relevant criterion relationships.
RESULTS: Content validity analysis suggests that the PROMIS pain measure was easy to use and interpret while the BPI provided more detail. However, BPI questions regarding medication usage and relief were unclear to some pregnant individuals. In addition, the relationships among pain ratings were stronger than relationships between pain ratings and measures intended to assess other constructs suggesting convergent and discriminant validity. Relationships with relevant criterions were presented for both the PROMIS and BPI by comparing ratings of pain intensity and severity for pregnant individuals with and without areas of pain reported on BPI.
CONCLUSION: Results indicate that PROMIS and BPI provided valid information on pain intensity or severity for our perinatal sample. Depending on the research question, the PROMIS pain or BPI may be more appropriate to an individual study. Either measure could also be included in an electronic health record for accurate pain assessment in clinical settings.
METHODS: Pregnant individuals (N = 196) were prospectively surveyed: n = 171 up to 22 weeks gestational age, n = 123 during their third trimester of pregnancy, and n = 98 both times. Additional measures included SPRINT Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Tool, Neurological Quality of Life, Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale and anxiety subscale, and Adverse Childhood Experiences Questionnaire. Validity evidence examined included content validity, reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, and relevant criterion relationships.
RESULTS: Content validity analysis suggests that the PROMIS pain measure was easy to use and interpret while the BPI provided more detail. However, BPI questions regarding medication usage and relief were unclear to some pregnant individuals. In addition, the relationships among pain ratings were stronger than relationships between pain ratings and measures intended to assess other constructs suggesting convergent and discriminant validity. Relationships with relevant criterions were presented for both the PROMIS and BPI by comparing ratings of pain intensity and severity for pregnant individuals with and without areas of pain reported on BPI.
CONCLUSION: Results indicate that PROMIS and BPI provided valid information on pain intensity or severity for our perinatal sample. Depending on the research question, the PROMIS pain or BPI may be more appropriate to an individual study. Either measure could also be included in an electronic health record for accurate pain assessment in clinical settings.