Literature DB >> 23247001

Cognitive testing and revision of the pain quality assessment scale.

Mark P Jensen1, Chen-Ping Lin, Amy E Kupper, Bradley S Galer, Arnold R Gammaitoni.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To revise the Pain Quality Assessment Scale (PQAS) using feedback from patients to further increase its validity.
METHODS: This project involved 3 cognitive interviewing studies. In Study 1, a group of patients with chronic pain (N=20) were asked a series of questions regarding the PQAS's understandability, and invited to make suggestions regarding how the measure could be improved. In Study 2, a second group of patients (N=21) responded to questions about a modified version of the PQAS. The PQAS was further modified on the basis of the findings of Study 2, and in Study 3 the participants were asked to indicate whether the changes made improved the understandability of the PQAS further.
RESULTS: The participants in Studies 1 and 2 identified portions of the PQAS instructions and some of the PQAS items that could be modified to increase their understandability. Modifications resulted in a revised PQAS that was deemed by patients with chronic pain to be more understandable than the original PQAS by the majority of participants. DISCUSSION: testing can be used to improve the understandability of pain measures. The results of cognitive testing with the PQAS indicated that much of the content of the original instructions and items were understandable as written, but that minor changes could be made to make them even clearer to patients with chronic pain. The changes made resulted in a revised PQAS that is more understandable and may therefore be even more useful than with the original PQAS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23247001     DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e318260857d

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin J Pain        ISSN: 0749-8047            Impact factor:   3.442


  6 in total

1.  Can pictorial images communicate the quality of pain successfully?

Authors:  S José Closs; Peter Knapp; Stephen Morley; Catherine Stones
Journal:  Br J Pain       Date:  2015-08

Review 2.  Patient phenotyping in clinical trials of chronic pain treatments: IMMPACT recommendations.

Authors:  Robert R Edwards; Robert H Dworkin; Dennis C Turk; Martin S Angst; Raymond Dionne; Roy Freeman; Per Hansson; Simon Haroutounian; Lars Arendt-Nielsen; Nadine Attal; Ralf Baron; Joanna Brell; Shay Bujanover; Laurie B Burke; Daniel Carr; Amy S Chappell; Penney Cowan; Mila Etropolski; Roger B Fillingim; Jennifer S Gewandter; Nathaniel P Katz; Ernest A Kopecky; John D Markman; George Nomikos; Linda Porter; Bob A Rappaport; Andrew S C Rice; Joseph M Scavone; Joachim Scholz; Lee S Simon; Shannon M Smith; Jeffrey Tobias; Tina Tockarshewsky; Christine Veasley; Mark Versavel; Ajay D Wasan; Warren Wen; David Yarnitsky
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 7.926

3.  Words that describe chronic musculoskeletal pain: implications for assessing pain quality across cultures.

Authors:  Saurab Sharma; Anupa Pathak; Mark P Jensen
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2016-11-16       Impact factor: 3.133

Review 4.  Clinical outcome assessment in clinical trials of chronic pain treatments.

Authors:  Kushang V Patel; Dagmar Amtmann; Mark P Jensen; Shannon M Smith; Christin Veasley; Dennis C Turk
Journal:  Pain Rep       Date:  2021-01-21

5.  Is Chronic Pain Temporal Pattern Associated with Middle-Aged and Older Adults' Perceptions of their Futures?

Authors:  Gillian Fennell; Abby Pui Wang Yip; M Carrington Reid; Susan Enguídanos; Elizabeth Zelinski; Corinna Löckenhoff
Journal:  Health Psychol Bull       Date:  2021-12-30

6.  Psychometric properties and validation of the revised Chinese Medication Literacy Scale for Hypertensive Patients (C-MLSHP-R).

Authors:  Ning Qin; Yinglong Duan; Ziqiang Yao; Shuangjiao Shi; Haoqi Liu; Xiao Li; Feng Zheng; Zhuqing Zhong
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-09-06
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.