OBJECTIVES: To evaluate usability and pain iconography of the Iconic Pain Assessment Tool Version 2 (IPAT2), a self-report instrument that combines word descriptors and representative images (icons) to assess pain quality, intensity, and location, among adults and adolescents with arthritis. METHODS: Adults with inflammatory arthritis and adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis partook in a single, semistructured, audio-recorded interview to evaluate: (1) the concreteness (object representativeness) and semantic distance (pain representativeness) of the IPAT2 iconography; (2) participants' current pain; and (3) perceptions and likes/dislikes of the IPAT2. Quantitative data were summarized descriptively and a line-by-line coding analysis identified key concepts from interview transcripts. The criterion for icon acceptability was mean and median ratings ≥5.0 for concreteness, semantic distance, and satisfaction for describing arthritis pain. RESULTS: The sample was comprised of 15 adults (87% female, mean 57 y) and 15 adolescents (67% female, mean age 15 y). The IPAT2 was reported to be easy to use and understand, well liked, quick to complete, and perceived as potentially valuable for communicating arthritis pain to health care providers. The median time needed to complete a single pain record, after 5-minute demonstration, was 2.3 minutes and 1.4 minutes for the adults and adolescents, respectively. All pain quality icons met or exceeded the criterion for acceptability. DISCUSSION: All a priori objectives for the IPAT2 were achieved in this sample of rheumatology outpatients. With its unique blend of pain quality descriptors and representative images, the IPAT2 may importantly aid the assessment of pain in adults and adolescents with arthritis.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate usability and pain iconography of the Iconic Pain Assessment Tool Version 2 (IPAT2), a self-report instrument that combines word descriptors and representative images (icons) to assess pain quality, intensity, and location, among adults and adolescents with arthritis. METHODS: Adults with inflammatory arthritis and adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis partook in a single, semistructured, audio-recorded interview to evaluate: (1) the concreteness (object representativeness) and semantic distance (pain representativeness) of the IPAT2 iconography; (2) participants' current pain; and (3) perceptions and likes/dislikes of the IPAT2. Quantitative data were summarized descriptively and a line-by-line coding analysis identified key concepts from interview transcripts. The criterion for icon acceptability was mean and median ratings ≥5.0 for concreteness, semantic distance, and satisfaction for describing arthritis pain. RESULTS: The sample was comprised of 15 adults (87% female, mean 57 y) and 15 adolescents (67% female, mean age 15 y). The IPAT2 was reported to be easy to use and understand, well liked, quick to complete, and perceived as potentially valuable for communicating arthritis pain to health care providers. The median time needed to complete a single pain record, after 5-minute demonstration, was 2.3 minutes and 1.4 minutes for the adults and adolescents, respectively. All pain quality icons met or exceeded the criterion for acceptability. DISCUSSION: All a priori objectives for the IPAT2 were achieved in this sample of rheumatology outpatients. With its unique blend of pain quality descriptors and representative images, the IPAT2 may importantly aid the assessment of pain in adults and adolescents with arthritis.