KyungHun Han1, DoWan Kim2, Sungkun Cho3. 1. Division of Sport Science, Pusan National University, 63 Busandaekak-ro, Geumjeong-gu, Busan, Korea. 2. Kimchan Hospital, 1011-4, Gwonseon-dong, Gwonseon-gu, Suwon, Gyeonggi-do, Korea. 3. Department of Psychology, Chungnam National University, 99 Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, Korea. sungkunc@cnu.ac.kr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study investigated the psychometric properties of the Korean version of the Brief Pain Response Inventory (K-BPRI) regarding patients with chronic pain. METHODS: This study employed a retrospective survey design. One hundred sixty-four Korean patients with chronic pain participated in the study. Construct validity was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis and Pearson correlation. Internal consistency reliability, test-retest reliability, and measurement error were examined using Cronbach's α, the inter-item correlation coefficients, and the item-total correlation coefficients; the intra-class correlation coefficient; and the standard error of measurements, respectively. RESULTS: Confirmatory factory analysis showed the best fit to the data for the adjusted two-factor structure of the K-BPRI. The K-BPRI demonstrated good internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Measurement errors for the K-BPRI and subscale scores were standard error of measurements = 5.74, 5.63, and 10.26, respectively, and minimum detectable change = 15.86, 15.56, and 28.35, respectively. Weak-to-moderate negative correlations were observed between the K-BPRI and the numerical rating scale for pain intensity and the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale, and moderately positive correlations were observed between the K-BPRI and Short Form-12. CONCLUSION: This study provided evidence for the psychometric properties of the K-BPRI, suggesting that it can be a brief and efficient instrument for measuring psychological flexibility in coping with chronic pain.
PURPOSE: This study investigated the psychometric properties of the Korean version of the Brief Pain Response Inventory (K-BPRI) regarding patients with chronic pain. METHODS: This study employed a retrospective survey design. One hundred sixty-four Korean patients with chronic pain participated in the study. Construct validity was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis and Pearson correlation. Internal consistency reliability, test-retest reliability, and measurement error were examined using Cronbach's α, the inter-item correlation coefficients, and the item-total correlation coefficients; the intra-class correlation coefficient; and the standard error of measurements, respectively. RESULTS: Confirmatory factory analysis showed the best fit to the data for the adjusted two-factor structure of the K-BPRI. The K-BPRI demonstrated good internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Measurement errors for the K-BPRI and subscale scores were standard error of measurements = 5.74, 5.63, and 10.26, respectively, and minimum detectable change = 15.86, 15.56, and 28.35, respectively. Weak-to-moderate negative correlations were observed between the K-BPRI and the numerical rating scale for pain intensity and the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale, and moderately positive correlations were observed between the K-BPRI and Short Form-12. CONCLUSION: This study provided evidence for the psychometric properties of the K-BPRI, suggesting that it can be a brief and efficient instrument for measuring psychological flexibility in coping with chronic pain.