Jun Kyung Sung1, Jeong-Hyun Choi2, Jinyoung Jeong3, Won-Joong Kim4, Da Jeong Lee5, Sang Chul Lee1, Yong-Chul Kim1, Jee Youn Moon1. 1. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 2. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, College of Medicine, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Korea. 3. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The Armed Forces Capital Hospital, Sungnam-si, Gyonggi-do. 4. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 5. University Medical Center, De La Salle Health Sciences Institute, Dasmariñas, Cavite, Philippines.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to adapt the painDETECT Questionnaire (PD-Q) into a Korean version (KPD-Q) and validate it. METHODS: A single-center prospective observational study was performed. During the first phase of the study, linguistic adaptation was carried out to develop the KPD-Q. During the second phase of the study, feasibility, internal consistency, discriminant validity, and concurrent validity were assessed for psychometric validation of the KPD-Q. RESULTS: A total of 232 patients participated. Among them, 82 patients (35%) were classified in the neuropathic pain (NeP) group, 80 (34%) in the nociceptive pain group, and 70 (30%) in the mixed pain group. Regarding the reliability of the KPD-Q, internal consistency for the whole scale was 0.804, as evaluated by Cronbach's alpha. Pearson's correlation between the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs scale and the KPD-Q scores was positive and statistically significant (r = 0.74, P < 0.001). Similar to the result obtained by the original developers, a value of ≥ 19 points suggested a clear diagnosis of the presence of an NeP component with 95.4% sensitivity, 73.8% specificity, and 0.737 Youden index. We used ≤ 13 (as opposed to ≤ 12, as suggested previously) as an alternative cutoff value, which showed a sensitivity of 95.4%, specificity of 73.8%, and the Youden index of 0.691. CONCLUSION: The KPD-Q showed good psychometric and discriminant features for assessing the neuropathic component in chronic pain patients. We hope that this newly validated KPD-Q will be recognized in Korea as a credible tool for detection of NeP and thus may be used in further international clinical research.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to adapt the painDETECT Questionnaire (PD-Q) into a Korean version (KPD-Q) and validate it. METHODS: A single-center prospective observational study was performed. During the first phase of the study, linguistic adaptation was carried out to develop the KPD-Q. During the second phase of the study, feasibility, internal consistency, discriminant validity, and concurrent validity were assessed for psychometric validation of the KPD-Q. RESULTS: A total of 232 patients participated. Among them, 82 patients (35%) were classified in the neuropathic pain (NeP) group, 80 (34%) in the nociceptive pain group, and 70 (30%) in the mixed pain group. Regarding the reliability of the KPD-Q, internal consistency for the whole scale was 0.804, as evaluated by Cronbach's alpha. Pearson's correlation between the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs scale and the KPD-Q scores was positive and statistically significant (r = 0.74, P < 0.001). Similar to the result obtained by the original developers, a value of ≥ 19 points suggested a clear diagnosis of the presence of an NeP component with 95.4% sensitivity, 73.8% specificity, and 0.737 Youden index. We used ≤ 13 (as opposed to ≤ 12, as suggested previously) as an alternative cutoff value, which showed a sensitivity of 95.4%, specificity of 73.8%, and the Youden index of 0.691. CONCLUSION: The KPD-Q showed good psychometric and discriminant features for assessing the neuropathic component in chronic painpatients. We hope that this newly validated KPD-Q will be recognized in Korea as a credible tool for detection of NeP and thus may be used in further international clinical research.
Authors: Hans Timmerman; André P Wolff; Ewald M Bronkhorst; Oliver H G Wilder-Smith; Marcel J Schenkels; Nick T van Dasselaar; Frank J P M Huygen; Monique A H Steegers; Kris C P Vissers Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2018-06-29 Impact factor: 2.474
Authors: Victoria R van Trigt; Iris C M Pelsma; Herman M Kroon; Alberto M Pereira; Coen van der Meulen; Margreet Kloppenburg; Nienke R Biermasz; Kim M J A Claessen Journal: Pituitary Date: 2021-10-23 Impact factor: 4.107
Authors: Jéssica Pinto Martins do Rio; Juliana Valentim Bittencourt; Leticia Amaral Corrêa; Rainer Freynhagen; Felipe José Jandre Dos Reis; Tamiris Barbosa de Melo; Diego Galace; Leandro Alberto Calazans Nogueira Journal: Braz J Anesthesiol Date: 2021-07-03