COVERS Escala de dolor neonatal: Desarrollo y validación. |
COVERS Neonatal Pain Scale: Development and Validation.
Hand IL, Noble L, Geiss D, Wozniak L, Hall C.
Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Queens Hospital Center, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, 82-68 164th Street, Jamaica, NY 11432, USA.
Int J Pediatr. 2010;2010:496719. Epub 2010 Oct 5.
Abstract
Newborns and infants are often exposed to painful procedures during hospitalization. Several different scales have been validated to assess pain in specific populations of pediatric patients, but no single scale can easily and accurately assess pain in all newborns and infants regardless of gestational age and disease state. A new pain scale was developed, the COVERS scale, which incorporates 6 physiological and behavioral measures for scoring. Newborns admitted to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit or Well Baby Nursery were evaluated for pain/discomfort during two procedures, a heel prick and a diaper change. Pain was assessed using indicators from three previously established scales (CRIES, the Premature Infant Pain Profile, and the Neonatal Infant Pain Scale), as well as the COVERS Scale, depending upon gestational age. Premature infant testing resulted in similar pain assessments using the COVERS and PIPP scales with an r = 0.84. For the full-term infants, the COVERS scale and NIPS scale resulted in similar pain assessments with an r = 0.95. The COVERS scale is a valid pain scale that can be used in the clinical setting to assess pain in newborns and infants and is universally applicable to all neonates, regardless of their age or physiological state.
Enlace para el artículo en PDF
|
| Comparación de la cuantificación de la severidad del dolor mediante calificación con escala verbal y calificación con escala numérica. |
Comparing quantification of pain severity by verbal rating and numeric rating scales. Dijkers M. Rehabilitation Medicine, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, One Gustave Levy Place, Box 1240, New York, NY 10029-6574, USA. marcel.dijkers@msnyuhealth.orgJ Spinal Cord Med. 2010;33(3):232-42. Abstract
BACKGROUND: Researchers have reported widely varying correlations among the 3 main instruments used to quantify pain severity, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Verbal Rating Scale (VRS), and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), both at the level of groups and at the level of individuals. OBJECTIVE: To assess the comparability of reports of pain severity using a VRS and a NRS in a spinal cord injury (SCI) sample. METHODS: Data were taken from a longitudinal observational study. Patients were 168 individuals with new traumatic SCI admitted for inpatient rehabilitation who completed the VRS and NRS multiple times, each time for multiple pains as appropriate. RESULTS: For 1114 ratings of pain, VRS and corresponding NRS ratings were correlated weakly (Spearman correlation, rho = 0.38). For 36 individuals with at least 10 completions of paired VRS and NRS, rho ranged from -0.55 to 0.76. Variation in NRS rating for each VRS adjective was reduced by about 25% when between-patient variation was eliminated. Mean NRS ratings by VRS adjective, for patients who had used each of at least 2 adjectives at least 5 times each, showed large differences in mean NRS scores between individuals using the same VRS adjective. CONCLUSION: There are considerable differences between individuals in how NRS and VRS are used; there also seem to be individuals whose understanding of the meaning of the VRS adjectives is completely different from what was assumed by the creators of this VRS. Both VRS and NRS data must be used with extreme caution by SCI clinicians and researchers Enlace para bajar el artículo en PDF
|
| Escala multidimensional para evaluar el dolor |
Multidimensional pain evaluation scale.
Sousa FA, Pereira LV, Cardoso R, Hortense P.
Escola de Enfermagem, Ribeirão Preto College of Nursing, University of São Paulo, Brazil. faleiros@eerp.usp.br
Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2010 Jan-Feb;18(1):3-10.
Abstract
This study developed a pain evaluation scale and validated it for the Portuguese language. Development of the inventory--308 readily available pain descriptors--were searched in international literature and validated by six judges. One hundred descriptors of acute pain and 100 descriptors of chronic pain were found, which were used in the next stage. Statistical validation--493 health professionals and 146 patients experiencing acute and chronic pain participated in the study. Instructions, pain descriptors and respective definitions, pen and measuring tape were provided to participants. Psychophysical methods were used to establish categories, magnitude and cross-modality matching using line-length. Results revealed the ranking of the most frequently used descriptors of acute and chronic pain, with power equal to 0.99, close to the predicted (one), using line-length estimations. The Multidimensional Pain Evaluation Scale is thus validated for the Portuguese language.
Enlace para el PDF
|
| Validación de la versión en español del CPAQ para la valoración de su aceptación en fibromialgia. |
Validation of the Spanish version of the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ) for the assessment of acceptance in fibromyalgia.
Rodero B, García-Campayo J, Casanueva B, del Hoyo YL, Serrano-Blanco A, Luciano JV.
Department of Psychiatry, Miguel Servet University Hospital, Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud, Spain.
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010 Apr 12;8:37.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to validate a Spanish version of the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ). Pain acceptance is the process of giving up the struggle with pain and learning to live a worthwhile life despite it. The Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ) is the questionnaire most often used to measure pain acceptance in chronic pain populations. METHODS: A total of 205 Spanish patients diagnosed with fibromyalgia syndrome who attended our pain clinic were asked to complete a battery of psychometric instruments: the Pain Visual Analogue Scale (PVAS) for pain intensity, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36 (SF-36), the Pain Catastrophising Scale (PCS) and the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ). RESULTS: Analysis of results showed that the Spanish CPAQ had good test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.83) and internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha: 0.83). The Spanish CPAQ score significantly correlated with pain intensity, anxiety, depression, pain catastrophising, health status and physical and psychosocial disability. The Scree plot and a Principal Components Factor analysis confirmed the same two-factor construct as the original English CPAQ. CONCLUSION: The Spanish CPAQ is a reliable clinical assessment tool with valid construct validity for the acceptance measurement among a sample of Spanish fibromyalgia patients. This study will make it easier to assess pain acceptance in Spanish populations with fibromyalgia.
Enlace para el artículo en PDF
|
|
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario