OBJECTIVE: Measurement of pain interference in children is challenged by a lack of validated measures with a parent proxy report. This study investigated the psychometric properties of the Pain Interference Index (PII), a six-item questionnaire originally developed in Swedish, in chronically ill youth. METHODS: We adapted the PII for English-speaking participants and created a parallel parent proxy measure. Respondents indicate how much pain has interfered with the child's life in the past 2 weeks (0-6 scale); higher scores indicate more pain interference. Eligible participants included individuals 6-25 years with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) and cancer. Internal consistency was assessed; validity was examined by correlating PII scores with existing measures of pain interference (Modified Brief Pain Inventory [MBPI]) and pain intensity (visual analogue scale [VAS]), and with measures of disease severity. RESULTS: Among 60 participants (mean age 14.7 years, range 6-24) and their parents, PII internal consistency was 0.84 and 0.96, respectively. PII scores correlated with MBPI (r = 0.81, P < 0.0001) and VAS (r = 0.55, P < 0.0001) scores and differentiated between patients with mild vs moderate/severe NF1 disease severity (P < 0.05). The PII-Parent was significantly correlated with the mothers' and fathers' VAS rating of the child's pain intensity (Ps < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Internal consistency of the English PII is high; validity is supported by the PII's correlations with other measures of pain interference and pain intensity, and with disease severity in patients with NF1. Preliminary data indicate that the English PII is a reliable, valid, feasible pain interference measure for youth with NF1 and cancer. Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
OBJECTIVE: Measurement of pain interference in children is challenged by a lack of validated measures with a parent proxy report. This study investigated the psychometric properties of the Pain Interference Index (PII), a six-item questionnaire originally developed in Swedish, in chronically ill youth. METHODS: We adapted the PII for English-speaking participants and created a parallel parent proxy measure. Respondents indicate how much pain has interfered with the child's life in the past 2 weeks (0-6 scale); higher scores indicate more pain interference. Eligible participants included individuals 6-25 years with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) and cancer. Internal consistency was assessed; validity was examined by correlating PII scores with existing measures of pain interference (Modified Brief Pain Inventory [MBPI]) and pain intensity (visual analogue scale [VAS]), and with measures of disease severity. RESULTS: Among 60 participants (mean age 14.7 years, range 6-24) and their parents, PII internal consistency was 0.84 and 0.96, respectively. PII scores correlated with MBPI (r = 0.81, P < 0.0001) and VAS (r = 0.55, P < 0.0001) scores and differentiated between patients with mild vs moderate/severe NF1 disease severity (P < 0.05). The PII-Parent was significantly correlated with the mothers' and fathers' VAS rating of the child's pain intensity (Ps < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Internal consistency of the English PII is high; validity is supported by the PII's correlations with other measures of pain interference and pain intensity, and with disease severity in patients with NF1. Preliminary data indicate that the English PII is a reliable, valid, feasible pain interference measure for youth with NF1 and cancer. Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Authors: Susan Halabi; Nicholas J Vogelzang; Alice B Kornblith; San-San Ou; Philip W Kantoff; Nancy A Dawson; Eric J Small Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-05-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kim M Keppler-Noreuil; Julie C Sapp; Marjorie J Lindhurst; Thomas N Darling; Jasmine Burton-Akright; Mohammadhadi Bagheri; Eva Dombi; Ashlyn Gruber; Paul F Jarosinski; Staci Martin; Neera Nathan; Scott M Paul; Ronald E Savage; Pamela L Wolters; Brian Schwartz; Brigitte C Widemann; Leslie G Biesecker Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2019-02-22 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Pamela L Wolters; Staci Martin; Vanessa L Merker; James H Tonsgard; Sondra E Solomon; Andrea Baldwin; Amanda L Bergner; Karin Walsh; Heather L Thompson; Kathy L Gardner; Cynthia M Hingtgen; Elizabeth Schorry; William N Dudley; Barbara Franklin Journal: Neurology Date: 2016-08-16 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Andrea M Gross; Pamela L Wolters; Eva Dombi; Andrea Baldwin; Patricia Whitcomb; Michael J Fisher; Brian Weiss; AeRang Kim; Miriam Bornhorst; Amish C Shah; Staci Martin; Marie C Roderick; Dominique C Pichard; Amanda Carbonell; Scott M Paul; Janet Therrien; Oxana Kapustina; Kara Heisey; D Wade Clapp; Chi Zhang; Cody J Peer; William D Figg; Malcolm Smith; John Glod; Jaishri O Blakeley; Seth M Steinberg; David J Venzon; L Austin Doyle; Brigitte C Widemann Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2020-03-18 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Marie Kanstrup; Rikard K Wicksell; Mike Kemani; Camilla Wiwe Lipsker; Mats Lekander; Linda Holmström Journal: Children (Basel) Date: 2016-11-16
Authors: Leslie G Biesecker; Matthew Edwards; Sheridan O'Donnell; Paula Doherty; Thomas MacDougall; Kate Tith; Julia Kazakin; Brian Schwartz Journal: Cold Spring Harb Mol Case Stud Date: 2020-02-03
Authors: Adrienne Yl Chan; Mengqin Ge; Emily Harrop; Margaret Johnson; Kate Oulton; Simon S Skene; Ian Ck Wong; Liz Jamieson; Richard F Howard; Christina Liossi Journal: Palliat Med Date: 2021-12-29 Impact factor: 4.762
Authors: Christopher A Ours; Julie C Sapp; Mia B Hodges; Allison J de Moya; Leslie G Biesecker Journal: Cold Spring Harb Mol Case Stud Date: 2021-12-09
Authors: Meena N Murugappan; Bellinda L King-Kallimanis; Gregory H Reaman; Vishal Bhatnagar; Erica G Horodniceanu; Najat Bouchkouj; Paul G Kluetz Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Julia D H P Simon; Sasja A Schepers; Martha A Grootenhuis; Maarten Mensink; Angelique D Huitema; Wim J E Tissing; Erna M C Michiels Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2021-06-16 Impact factor: 3.603