The psychometric qualities of four observational pain tools (OPTs) for the assessment of pain in elderly people with osteoarthritic pain

Measuring Pain in Aphasia: Validity and Reliability of the PACSLAC-D

BACKGROUND

Post-stroke pain in patients with an inability to communicate is not systematically assessed and therefore not sufficiently treated. This stresses the need to study pain assessment instruments that do not require good communication skills.

AIM

To examine the validity and reliability of the Pain Assessment Checklist for Seniors with Limited Ability to Communicate - Dutch version (PACSLAC-D) in stroke patients with aphasia.

METHOD

Sixty stroke patients (mean age 79.3 years, standard deviation [SD] 8.0), of whom 27 had aphasia were observed during rest, activities of daily living (ADL), and physiotherapy using the Pain Assessment Checklist for Seniors with Limited Ability to Communicate - Dutch version (PACSLAC-D). The observations were repeated after two weeks. To examine convergent validity, correlations between the PACSLAC-D, self-report pain scales, and the clinical judgment of a health care professional (pain present yes/no) were used. To examine discriminative validity, differences in pain were investigated between rest and ADL, in patients who use pain medication and those who do not, and in patients with and without aphasia. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were assessed to determine reliability.

RESULTS

Convergent validity failed to meet the acceptable threshold during rest but was adequate during ADL and physiotherapy. Discriminative validity was only adequate during ADL. The internal consistency was 0.33 during rest, 0.71 during ADL, and 0.65 during physiotherapy. Test-retest reliability varied from poor during rest (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.07; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.40-0.51) to excellent during physiotherapy (ICC = 0.95; 95% CI: 0.83-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

The PACSLAC-D captures pain in patients with aphasia who are unable to self-report, during ADL and physiotherapy, but may be less accurate during rest.

Physicians' and nurses' experience of using the Abbey Pain Scale (APS) in people with advanced cancer: a qualitative content analysis

BACKGROUND

The Abbey Pain Scale (APS), an observational scale used to assess pain in people with end-stage dementia, is also widely used in Sweden to assess pain in patients with advanced cancer. It is unclear whether the APS is appropriate in this context. This study aims to explore physicians' and nurses' experiences of using a Swedish translation of the APS (the APS-SE) in people with advanced cancer.

METHODS

Conventional qualitative content analysis was used to analyse interviews with physicians (n = 6) and nurses (n = 6) working in oncology and specialised palliative care about their experiences of using the APS-SE.

RESULTS

Three categories were created: fills a need, not always on target, and does not fully suit the clinical situation. Participants reported that although the APS-SE provides support in a challenging situation, it sometimes misses the mark: it does not distinguish well between pain and other types of suffering and its pain score tends not to reflect professionals' intuitive perceptions of patients' suffering. Some parts of the APS-SE were not considered useful, and others were perceived as ethically questionable.

CONCLUSION

Health professionals greatly need an observational pain assessment tool for people with advanced cancer. The APS-SE is helpful in this context, but participants did not perceive it as ideal. Its problems seem inherent to the original APS rather than related to its translation from English to Swedish. Further research is needed to provide a more suitable pain assessment tool for patients with advanced cancer.

Psychometric properties of pain measurements for people living with dementia: a COSMIN systematic review

PURPOSE

Detecting pain in older people with dementia is challenging. Consequentially, pain is often under-reported and under-treated. There remains uncertainty over what measures should be promoted for use to assess pain in this population. The purpose of this paper is to answer this question.

METHODS

A search of clinical trials registered on the ClinicalTrial.gov and ISRCTN registries was performed to identify outcome measures used to assess pain in people with dementia. Following this, a systematic review of published and unpublished databases was performed to 01 November 2021 to identify papers assessing the psychometric properties of these identified measures. Each paper and measure was assessed against the COSMIN checklist. A best evidence synthesis analysis was performed to assess the level of evidence for each measure.

RESULTS

From 188 clinical trials, nine outcome measures were identified. These included: Abbey Pain Scale, ALGOPLUS, DOLOPLUS-2, Facial Action Coding System, MOBID-2, self-reported pain through the NRS or VAS/thermometer or Philadelphia Geriatric Pain Intensity Scale, PACSLAC/PACSLAC-2, Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia (PAINAD), and Checklist for non-verbal pain behavior (CNPI). From these, 51 papers (5924 people with dementia) were identified assessing the psychometric properties of these measures. From these, there was strong- and moderate-level evidence to support the use of the facial action coding system, PACSLAC and PACSLAC-II, CNPI, DOLOPLUS-2, ALGOPLUS, MOBID, and MOBID-2 tools for the assessment of pain with people living with dementia.

CONCLUSION

Whilst these reflect measurement tools used in research, further consideration on how these reflect clinical practice should be considered.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42021282032.

Invariance of the PAINAD Scale Between the Black and White Residents Living With Dementia

The purpose of this study was to test the reliability and validity of the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia (PAINAD) and particularly consider whether or not this measure was invariant when used among the Black and White residents. Baseline data from an implementation study testing that included a sample of 553 residents, 30% of who were Black, from 55 nursing were included in this study. The Winsteps statistical program was used to perform the Rasch analysis and evaluate the reliability and validity of the measure based on internal consistency, infit and outfit statistics, mapping, and a differential item functioning (DIF) analysis. The AMOS statistical program was used for confirmatory factor analysis. The findings supported the reliability and validity of the PAINAD when used with these individuals and demonstrated that there was no evidence of invariance between the Black and White residents. All the items fit the model, but there was not a good spread of the items across the pain level of the participants. The majority of the participants (75%) were so low in pain signs or symptoms that they could not be differentiated. Based on the clinical practice and observations, it is recommended that additional items can be added to the measure such as observing the individual for evidence of resisting care, retropulsion when trying to stand, hitting or kicking when turning in bed, hitting or kicking when transferring from bed to chair, hitting or kicking when ambulating, or hitting or kicking when raising arms, less engagement with others, and decreased participation in the activities previously enjoyed.

Care home residents’ quality of life and its association with CQC ratings and workforce issues: the MiCareHQ mixed-methods study

Background

Care home staff have a critical bearing on quality. The staff employed, the training they receive and how well they identify and manage residents’ needs are likely to influence outcomes. The Care Act 2014 (Great Britain. The Care Act 2014. London: The Stationery Office; 2014) requires services to improve ‘well-being’, but many residents cannot self-report and are at risk of exclusion from giving their views. The Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit enables social care-related quality of life to be measured using a mixed-methods approach. There is currently no equivalent way of measuring aspects of residents’ health-related quality of life. We developed new tools for measuring pain, anxiety and depression using a mixed-methods approach. We also explored the relationship between care home quality, residents’ outcomes, and the skill mix and employment conditions of the workforce who support them.

Objectives

The objectives were to develop and test measures of pain, anxiety and depression for residents unable to self-report; to assess the extent to which regulator quality ratings reflect residents’ care-related quality of life; and to assess the relationship between aspects of the staffing of care homes and the quality of care homes.

Design

This was a mixed-methods study.

Setting

The setting was care homes for older adults in England.

Participants

Care home residents participated.

Results

Three measures of pain, anxiety and low mood were developed and tested, using a mixed-methods approach, with 182 care home residents in 20 care homes (nursing and residential). Psychometric testing found that the measures had good construct validity. The mixed-methods approach was both feasible and necessary with this population, as the majority of residents could not self-report. Using a combined data set (n = 475 residents in 54 homes) from this study and the Measuring Outcomes in Care Homes study (Towers AM, Palmer S, Smith N, Collins G, Allan S. A cross-sectional study exploring the relationship between regulator quality ratings and care home residents’ quality of life in England. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2019;17:22) we found a significant positive association between residents’ social care-related quality of life and regulator (i.e. Care Quality Commission) quality ratings. Multivariate regression revealed that homes rated ‘good/outstanding’ are associated with a 12% improvement in mean current social care-related quality of life among residents who have higher levels of dependency. Secondary data analysis of a large, national sample of care homes over time assessed the impact of staffing and employment conditions on Care Quality Commission quality ratings. Higher wages and a higher prevalence of training in both dementia and dignity-/person-centred care were positively associated with care quality, whereas high staff turnover and job vacancy rates had a significant negative association. A 10% increase in the average care worker wage increased the likelihood of a ‘good/outstanding’ rating by 7%.

Limitations

No care homes rated as inadequate were recruited to the study.

Conclusions

The most dependent residents gain the most from homes rated ‘good/outstanding’. However, measuring the needs and outcomes of these residents is challenging, as many cannot self-report. A mixed-methods approach can reduce methodological exclusion and an over-reliance on proxies. Improving working conditions and reducing staff turnover may be associated with better outcomes for residents.

Future work

Further work is required to explore the relationship between pain, anxiety and low mood and other indicators of care homes quality and to examine the relationship between wages, training and social care outcomes.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 9, No. 19. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Low back pain: critical assessment of various scales

PURPOSE

To study the various pain assessment tools based on their psychometric properties and ease of use.

METHODS

Published articles on psychometric properties of pain tools were accessed and data collected for low back pain (LBP)-specific tools, generic tools, neuropathic LBP tools, tools for cognitively impaired patients, and tools for acute LBP.

RESULTS

Among the LBP-specific tools, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) have good construct validity and reliability, and responsiveness over short intervals. Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS) gauges only disability and sleep. Among the generic tools, McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory (MPI), and Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) show good responsiveness, but BPI is the only tool validated for LBP. Neuropathic Pain Scale (NPS) and Short Form-MPQ-2 (SF-MPQ-2) are both reliable tools for neuropathic LBP. For cognitively impaired patients, Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia (PAINAD), Abbey Pain Scale (APS), and Doloplus-2 are all reliable tools, but PAINAD has good construct validity. For acute pain, Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment (CAPA) is reliable and responsive, but presently, unidimensional tools and SF-MPQ-2 are the tools most preferred.

CONCLUSION

Based on psychometric properties and ease of use, the best tools for LBP seem to be RMDQ/ODI (among LBP-specific tools), BPI (among generic tools), SF-MPQ-2/NPS (for neuropathic LBP), PAINAD (for cognitively impaired patients), and unidimensional tools and SF-MPQ-2 (for acute pain). Overall, BPI seems to be a tool that can be relied upon the most. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Developing a Training for Certified Nursing Assistants to Recognize, Communicate, and Document Discomfort in Residents With Dementia

Nursing home residents with advanced dementia experience significant symptom burden and may be unable to articulate their needs. Observational tools, such as the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia (PAINAD) scale, are available to evaluate changes in behavior that may signify discomfort or pain. Studies proposing a short and effective curriculum, primarily for certified nursing assistants (CNAs) on how to use and incorporate the PAINAD in daily patient care, are scarce. This performance improvement project involves the design and implementation of a training curriculum for CNAs for using the PAINAD and discusses barriers to be considered for further projects. Certified nursing assistant perceptions of their experience with the training and the use of the tool were also assessed with a brief evaluation. Seventy-three initial PAINAD forms were completed along with 52 follow-up PAINAD forms. A paired t test (N = 52) showed a significant decrease in the PAINAD scores from initial (mean, 6.06) to follow-up (mean, 1.85) (P < .001), suggesting a reduction of patient discomfort. The process of collecting and examining these data was meant to reinforce the identification and reduction of behavioral distress through the application of this tool. The training was perceived as effective and the tool as easy to use, indicating it can be incorporated into daily care responsibilities of CNAs.

The Role of Nurses' Uncertainty in Decision-Making Process of Pain Management in People with Dementia

Pain in people with dementia (PWD) is underassessed and undertreated. Treatment of pain in people with dementia goes awry because of poor assessment, poor treatment, and factors related to nursing decision-making skills. Several theoretical models addressed the role of nurses' critical thinking and decision-making skills in pain treatment, like the cognitive continuum theory (CCT) and the adaptive pain management (APT). Only the Response to Certainty of Pain (RCP) model was the first model to posit relationships between nurses' uncertainty, pain assessment, and patient outcomes. Gilmore-Bykovskyi and Bowers developed the RCP, which incorporates the concept of uncertainty and how it relates to the problem of unrelieved pain in PWD. The RCP model has the potential to provide good understanding of the problem of unrelieved pain in people with dementia. It also could help to develop a research study that brings comfort to an often neglected and vulnerable population.

Pain Treatments for Nursing Home Residents with Advanced Dementia and Substantial Impaired Communication: A Cross-Sectional Analysis at Baseline of a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Objectives

This is a cross-sectional analysis at baseline of a cluster randomized controlled trial to identify factors associated with the use of pharmacological and nonpharmacological pain treatments by nursing home residents with dementia and impaired communication.

Methods

One hundred thirty-four residents with dementia and impaired communication were recruited. Nine of them were excluded because data on their pain treatments were missing, resulting in 125 for analysis. Hierarchical generalized estimating equations analyses controlling for the clustering effect of nursing homes were used to identify factors associated with the use of pharmacological and nonpharmacological pain treatments.

Results

Although all participants had a confirmed pain condition, only 23 (18.4%) and 45 (36%) had received pharmacological or nonpharmacological pain treatments, respectively. Participants with a higher ability to communicate ( P  = 0.031) and fewer pain locations were found to be more likely to receive pain medications, with the impact of communication ability being greater among participants with better cognitive status than among those with poor cognitive status. Participants who had been living in the home longer and who were more dependent were less likely to receive nonpharmacological treatments.

Conclusion

Suboptimal pain management was common among this population. Severe impairment in the ability to communicate is a major reason for the underuse of pain medications. Staff may become desensitized and fail to perceive subtle changes in the residents' behavior as indicative of pain, leading to the underadministering of nonpharmacological treatments. To improve this situation, it is suggested that observational pain assessments be systematically carried out in nursing homes.

Self-report pain assessment tools for cognitively intact older adults: Integrative review

BACKGROUND

Pain is common in older adults, but it is often underreported or undertreated partly because many consider pain to be a normal consequence of ageing. Among the plethora of available self-report pain assessment tools, there is no synthetised evidence which tools are indicated for use among cognitively intact older adults.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

To understand documented self-report pain assessment tools that have been used among cognitively intact older adults, and to describe their characteristics including overall performance as well as studies demonstrating their use.

METHODS

A systematic search of the indexed databases PubMed, PsycINFO and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL Plus) was conducted to identify documented self-report pain assessment tools through peer-reviewed papers, including citations from January 1990 to December 2015. Thirty-five percentage of abstracts were independently evaluated by two raters according to specific criteria.

RESULTS

Among identified tools, the Iowa Pain Thermometer, the 6-point Verbal Descriptor Scale, the Numeric Rating Scale, the short form Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and the Geriatric Pain Measure (GPM) may be suitable tools for self-reported pain by cognitively intact older adults based on the statement of the literature. Only two self-report tools (the GPM and the Geriatric Painful Events Inventory) were designed specifically for older adults.

CONCLUSIONS

More studies are needed to evaluate pain measures' psychometric performance across different settings, racial/ethnic groups and disease categories. Since 80% of older adults have at least one chronic disease, multidimensional tools such as the GPM may need to be used more often for accurate self-report of pain.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Examining the psychometric properties of comprehensive self-report pain assessment tools informs recommendations for the selection of tools to be used in clinical practice.

Can an observational pain assessment tool improve time to analgesia for cognitively impaired older persons? A cluster randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of the study was to measure the impact of an observational pain assessment dementia tool on time from ED arrival to first dose of analgesic medicine.

METHODS

A multisite cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted to test the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia (PAINAD) tool. Patients aged 65 years or older suspected of a long bone fracture were screened for cognitive impairment using the Six-Item Screening (SIS) tool. Patients scoring 4 or less on SIS (intervention sites) were assessed for pain using PAINAD. Control sites, assessed pain using standard methods. The primary outcome was time to first dose of analgesia and was analysed on an intention-to-treat basis with a sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

We enrolled 602 patients, of which 323 (54%) were at intervention sites (n=4). The median time to analgesia was 82 min (IQR 45-151 min). There was no statistically significant difference in median time to analgesia for intervention 83 (IQR 48-158 min) and non-intervention 82 min (IQR 41-147 min) sites (p=0.414). After adjusting for age, fracture type, arrival mode and triage category, there remained no significant difference in time to analgesia (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.17, p=0.74). Of the 602 patients enrolled, 273 actually had cognitive impairment. A sensitivity analysis demonstrated patients at intervention sites received analgesia 13 min sooner (90 vs 103 min, p=0.91).

CONCLUSION

Use of the PAINAD was not associated with a shorter time to analgesia, although there was a clinically important but non-significant improvement in the cognitively impaired patient group. Further research is needed to address this clinically important and complex issue.

Low back pain in older adults: risk factors, management options and future directions

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the major disabling health conditions among older adults aged 60 years or older. While most causes of LBP among older adults are non-specific and self-limiting, seniors are prone to develop certain LBP pathologies and/or chronic LBP given their age-related physical and psychosocial changes. Unfortunately, no review has previously summarized/discussed various factors that may affect the effective LBP management among older adults. Accordingly, the objectives of the current narrative review were to comprehensively summarize common causes and risk factors (modifiable and non-modifiable) of developing severe/chronic LBP in older adults, to highlight specific issues in assessing and treating seniors with LBP, and to discuss future research directions. Existing evidence suggests that prevalence rates of severe and chronic LBP increase with older age. As compared to working-age adults, older adults are more likely to develop certain LBP pathologies (e.g., osteoporotic vertebral fractures, tumors, spinal infection, and lumbar spinal stenosis). Importantly, various age-related physical, psychological, and mental changes (e.g., spinal degeneration, comorbidities, physical inactivity, age-related changes in central pain processing, and dementia), as well as multiple risk factors (e.g., genetic, gender, and ethnicity), may affect the prognosis and management of LBP in older adults. Collectively, by understanding the impacts of various factors on the assessment and treatment of older adults with LBP, both clinicians and researchers can work toward the direction of more cost-effective and personalized LBP management for older people.

Measures to assess commonly experienced symptoms for people with dementia in long-term care settings: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

High symptom burden is common in long-term care residents with dementia and results in distress and behavioral challenges if undetected. Physicians may have limited time to regularly examine all residents, particularly those unable to self-report, and may rely on reports from caregivers who are frequently in a good position to detect symptoms quickly. We aimed to identify proxy-completed assessment measures of symptoms experienced by people with dementia, and critically appraise the psychometric properties and applicability for use in long-term care settings by caregivers.

METHODS

We searched Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and ASSIA from inception to 23 June 2015, supplemented by citation and reference searches. The search strategy used a combination of terms: dementia OR long-term care AND assessment AND symptoms (e.g. pain). Studies were included if they evaluated psychometric properties of proxy-completed symptom assessment measures for people with dementia in any setting or those of mixed cognitive abilities residing in long-term care settings. Measures were included if they did not require clinical training, and used proxy-observed behaviors to support assessment in verbally compromised people with dementia. Data were extracted on study setting and sample, measurement properties and psychometric properties. Measures were independently evaluated by two investigators using quality criteria for measurement properties, and evaluated for clinical applicability in long-term settings.

RESULTS

Of the 19,942 studies identified, 40 studies evaluating 32 measures assessing pain (n = 12), oral health (n = 2), multiple neuropsychiatric symptoms (n = 2), depression (n = 8), anxiety (n = 2), psychological wellbeing (n = 4), and discomfort (n = 2) were included. The majority of studies (31/40) were conducted in long-term care settings although none of the neuropsychiatric or anxiety measures were validated in this setting. The pain assessments, PAINAD and PACSLAC had the strongest psychometric evidence. The oral health, discomfort, and three psychological wellbeing measures were validated in this setting but require further psychometric evaluation. Depression measures were poor at detecting depression in this population. All measures require further investigation into agreement, responsiveness and interpretability.

CONCLUSIONS

Measures for pain are best developed for this population and setting. All other measures require further validation. A multi-symptom measure to support comprehensive assessment and monitoring in this population is required.

Integrating lifestyle approaches into osteoarthritis care

As the lifetime risk, societal cost, and overall functional impact of osteoarthritis (OA) is imposing, it is imperative that clinicians provide an individualized care model for patients. Patients must be offered a multiplicity of care strategies and encouraged to embrace lifestyle approaches for self-managing the effects and symptoms of OA. Certainly, the attitude of the clinician and patient will directly influence receptivity and implementation of lifestyle approaches. This work proposes how the use of structured and routine assessments and cognitive therapy ideologies may complement a comprehensive treatment plan. Assessments described herein include objective and/or self-report measures of physical function, pain, attitude about social support, and sleep quality. Baseline assessments followed by systematic monitoring of the results may give patients and clinicians valuable insight into the effectiveness of the care plan. Empirical evidence from randomized trials with OA patients highlights the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral change strategies for addressing salient concerns for OA (pain control, mobility performance, and sleep quality). Cognitive restructuring can provide patients with renewed power in managing their disease. Cognitive therapy topics discussed presently include: 1) what is OA?, 2) effectiveness of exercise and FITT (frequency, intensity, time, and type) principles for OA patients, 3) goal-setting and barriers, and 4) translating to independent care. Woven within the discussion about cognitive therapy are ideas about how the results from baseline assessments and group-mediated dynamics might assist more favorable outcomes. There are a plethora of assessments and cognitive therapy topics that could be utilized in the care strategy that we are promoting, but the present topics were selected for their low clinician and patient burden and promising results in trials with OA patients. Clinicians who are comfortable and knowledgeable about a wider range of management tools may serve more effectively in the critical, central management process and help patients embrace personal care more successfully.

Implementation of observational pain management protocol to improve pain management for long-term institutionalized older care residents with dementia: study protocol for a cluster-randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Systematic use of observational pain tools has been advocated as a means to improve pain management for care home residents with dementia. Pain experts suggest that any observational tool should be used as part of a comprehensive pain management protocol, which should include score interpretation and verification with appropriately suggested treatments. The Observational Pain Management Protocol (Protocol) was therefore developed. This study aims to investigate the extent to which the implementation of this Protocol can improve pain management in care home residents with dementia.

METHODS/DESIGN

In this two-group, single-blinded, cluster-randomized controlled trial, 122 care home residents with dementia and pain-related diagnoses will be recruited from eight care homes (that is 15 to 16 residents from each care home). Invitations will be sent to all local care homes who meet the home selection criteria. The eight care homes will be randomly selected from all care homes that agree to join this trial. They will then be randomized to either the control or experimental conditions. Participants from each care home will be placed into their home's corresponding group to avoid 'contamination' effects across participants. Each intervention cycle will take 16 weeks (that is, baseline assessment and care home staff training for 4 weeks and Protocol implementation for 12 weeks). The Protocol will guide the pain management of the participants in the experimental care homes. Meanwhile, the control care homes will continue their usual pain management strategies. Intervention effects will be measured weekly during the protocol implementation period and compared with the baseline measurements, as well as between the experimental and control conditions.

DISCUSSION

Although similar pain protocols have been suggested previously, the recommendations were based on experts' opinions rather than evaluation of research studies. The feasibility and effectiveness of this kind of pain management protocol, tailored to older people with dementia, remains unknown. The findings of this trial will offer strong evidence that better strategies for pain management should be used in the care home daily routine.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Centre for Clinical Trials: CUHK-CCT00367.

[Adaptation and validation of the Spanish version of the Pain Evaluation Scale in patients with advanced dementia: PAINAD-Sp]

INTRODUCTION

Pain in elderly people is considered a major concern in nursing home facilities affecting between 49% and 83% of the residents. Progression of Alzheimer's Disease causes more communication difficulties in patients with advanced dementia and therefore more problems to understand even the most simple pain evaluation scales. Identification and implementation of appropriate pain management strategies depends on an adequate pain assessment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The main objective of the study was to validate the Spanish version of the PAINAD Scale (PAINAD-Sp) and to assess its applicability in Spanish Geriatric Nursing Homes. The 20 patients diagnosed with severe dementia from a Geriatric Centre in Spain were observed by five observers with different professional profiles for 5 minutes to each participant, and PAINAD-Sp Scale was administered simultaneously to a Visual Analogical Scale-VAS. Three different observational conditions were established: resting condition, during presumably pleasant activity and during presumable painful activity.

RESULTS

Cronbach's alpha ranged between 0.467 and 0.827 (average 0.692), and rose if Breathing item was deleted. Inter-rater reliability ranged between 0.587 and 0.956. Correlation between PAINAD-Sp Scale total measures and VAS was statistically significant (P<.05) in all measures and ranged from 0.517 to 0.868.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings in the study showed that the scale is useful to measure pain in non communicative patients suffering from dementia. The scale maintains good levels of reliability for different healthcare professionals even when they have little training.

A psychometric evaluation of three pain rating scales for people with moderate to severe dementia

Little comparative information exists regarding the reliability and validity of pain rating scales for nurses to assess pain in people with moderate to severe dementia in residential aged care facilities. The objective of this study was to evaluate the relative psychometric merits of the Abbey Pain Scale, the DOLOPLUS-2 Scale, and the Checklist of Nonverbal Pain Indicators Scale, three well-known pain rating scales that have previously been used to assess pain in nonverbal people with dementia. An observational study design was used. Nurses (n = 26) independently rated a cross-section of people with moderate to severe dementia (n = 126) on two occasions. The Abbey Pain Scale and the DOLOPLUS-2 Scale showed good psychometric qualities in terms of reliability and validity, including resistance to the influence of rater characteristics. The Checklist of Nonverbal Pain Indicators Scale also had reasonable results but was not as psychometrically strong as the Abbey Pain Scale and DOLOPLUS-2 Scale. This study has provided comparative evidence for the reliability and validity of three pain rating scales in a single sample. These scales are strong, objective adjuncts in making comprehensive assessments of pain in people who are unable to self-report pain due to moderate to severe dementia, with each having their own strengths and weaknesses. The DOLOPLUS-2 Scale provides more reliable measurement, and the Abbey Pain Scale may be better suited than the other two scales for use by nurse raters who only occasionally use pain rating scales or who have lower level nursing qualifications.

Observer-rated pain assessment instruments improve both the detection of pain and the evaluation of pain intensity in people with dementia

BACKGROUND

Observer-rated pain assessment instruments for people with dementia have proliferated in recent years and are mainly effective in identifying the presence of pain. The objective of this study was to determine whether these tools can also be used to evaluate intensity of pain.

METHOD

Quasi-experimental design. Cognitively intact [Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) ≥ 24, n = 60] and impaired people (MMSE < 20, n = 65) in nursing home facilities took part in the study. Participants were observed at rest and during a movement protocol. Directly afterwards, the observer, blinded to cognitive status, completed three behavioural pain assessment instruments (Abbey Pain Scale, Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia Scale (PAINAD), Non-communicative Patient's Pain Assessment Instrument (NOPPAIN) ], before interviewing the resident about pain self-report.

RESULTS

Significant correlations were found between observer-rated and self-rated measures of pain and were stronger in persons with dementia than in cognitively intact adults. Discriminant function analysis (DFA) revealed: (1) that the use of observer-rated instruments improved recognition of the presence or absence of pain by up to 25.4% (in dementia) and 28.3% (in cognitively intact adults) above chance; and (2) the same instruments improved the classification of residents into the correct self-reported level of pain intensity by up to 42.5% (in dementia) and 34.1% (in cognitively intact adults) above chance. However, DFA also reveals a considerable rate of 'false alarms' for pain in cognitively intact and 'misses' in cognitively impaired people.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the Abbey Pain Scale, PAINAD or NOPPAIN improves both the recognition of pain presence/absence as well as rating pain severity in older people with impaired cognition.

Which score most likely represents pain on the observational PAINAD pain scale for patients with dementia?

OBJECTIVES

We sought to determine a cutoff score for the observational Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia (PAINAD), to adequately assess pain in clinical nursing home practice and research.

DESIGN AND SETTING

We used data from multiple sources. We performed a literature review on PAINAD, performed secondary data analysis of a study examining psychometric properties of PAINAD in nursing home patients with dementia, and performed another study in nursing home patients with dementia specifically aimed at determining a cutoff score for PAINAD.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with dementia in long term care facilities.

MEASUREMENTS

We related PAINAD scores (range 0 to 10) to (1) self-reported and proxy-reported pain by global clinical judgment and (2) scores on another pain assessment instrument (DOLOPLUS-2), and (3) we compared scores between painful and supposedly less painful conditions.

RESULTS

Findings from this study showed that a cutoff value of 2 should serve as a trigger for a trial with pain treatment. Although the majority of patients scoring 1 or 0 were not in pain, pain could be ruled out.

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings of multiple available data sources, we recommend that a PAINAD score of 2 or more can be used as an indicator of probable pain. A score of 1 is a sign to be attentive to possible pain. Future work may focus on cutoff scores for the presence of pain and severe pain in other frequently used pain tools, and on further development of methodology to assess cutoff scores.