Validation of Two Pain Assessment Tools Using a Standardized Nociceptive Stimulation in Critically Ill Adults

Validation of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) in pediatric patients undergoing orthopedic surgery

Background

Postoperative pain cannot be measured accurately among many children with intellectual and developmental disabilities, resulting in underrecognition or delay in recognition of pain. The Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) is a pain assessment tool that has been widely validated in critically ill and postoperative adults.

Aims

The objective of this study was to validate the CPOT for use with pediatric patients able to self-report and undergoing posterior spinal fusion surgery.

Methods

Twenty-four patients (10-18 years old) scheduled to undergo surgery were consented to this repeated-measure, within-subject study. To examine discriminative and criterion validation, CPOT scores and patients' self-reports of pain intensity were collected prospectively by a bedside rater before, during, and after a nonnociceptive and nociceptive procedure on the day following surgery. Patients' behavioral reactions were video recorded at the bedside and retrospectively viewed by two independent video raters to examine interrater and intrarater reliability of CPOT scores.

Results

Discriminative validation was supported with higher CPOT scores during the nociceptive procedure than during the nonnociceptive procedure. Criterion validation was supported with a moderate positive correlation between the CPOT scores and the patients' self-reported pain intensity during the nociceptive procedure. A CPOT cutoff score of ≥2 was associated with the maximum sensitivity (61.3%) and specificity (94.1%). Reliability analyses revealed poor to moderate agreement between bedside and video raters and moderate to excellent consistency within video raters.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that the CPOT may be a valid tool to detect pain in pediatric patients in the acute postoperative inpatient care unit after posterior spinal fusion.

Validation Testing of the European Portuguese Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool

Aim. The study aim was to validate the Portuguese version of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) in the critically ill adult population of Portugal. Methods. A prospective, observational cohort study was conducted to evaluate the CPOT in mechanically ventilated patients who were admitted to an intensive care unit. A consecutive sample of 110 patients was observed at rest pre-procedure, during a nociceptive procedure (NP) which includes turning/positioning and endotracheal or tracheal suctioning and 20 min post-procedure. Two raters participated in the data collection. The discriminative validity, criterion validity, convergent validity and inter-rater reliability of the CPOT were examined. Results. The inter-rater reliability was excellent (0.93 ≤ α ≤ 1.00) at rest and fair to moderate (0.39 ≤ α ≤ 0.60) during the NP. The CPOT could discriminate between conditions with higher scores during the NP when compared to CPOT scores at rest (p < 0.001). The optimal CPOT cut-off score was >2, with a sensitivity of 71% and a specificity of 80%, and self-reported pain was the gold standard criterion. Significant correlations (<0.40) were found between CPOT scores, the heart rate and the respiratory rate during the nociceptive procedure. Conclusions. The CPOT appears to be a valid alternative for both ventilated and non-ventilated patients who are unable to communicate.

CE: Assessing Movement-Evoked Pain

ABSTRACT

One of the most common and nuanced tasks that nurses perform is pain assessment, particularly in acute postoperative settings where frequent reassessments are needed. Most assessments are limited to obtaining a pain intensity score with little attention paid to the conditions necessitating the assessment or the factors contributing to the pain. Pain is frequently assessed during rest, but seldom during periods of movement or activity, which is a crucial omission given that acute postoperative movement-evoked pain (MEP) is intense and a common barrier to healing and restoration of function. In addition to physical limitations, MEP can impede cognitive, emotional, and social functioning in ways that can contribute to chronic pain, mood disorders, and disability. Professional and regulatory standards are moving away from a focus on pain intensity to an emphasis on its context, impact on function, and associated distress. Thus, there are many driving forces compelling nurses to integrate MEP assessments into practice to expedite the restoration of biopsychosocial functioning in postoperative patients. The authors discuss the clinical significance of a MEP assessment as well as protocols and tools for completing such assessments.

Comparison of two behavioural pain scales for the assessment of procedural pain: A systematic review

AIM

To examine the clinical utility and measurement properties of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool and the Behavioural Pain Scale when used to assess pain during procedures in the intensive care unit.

DESIGN

A systematic review was conducted, guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsychINFO (01 October 2019). Study selection, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality were performed by a pair of authors working independently. Different psychometric properties were addressed: inter-rater reliability, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, discriminant validity and criterion validity.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included. Both Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool and the Behavioural Pain Scale showed good reliability and validity and were good options for assessing pain during painful procedures with intensive care unit patients unable to self-report on pain. The Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool is to be preferred since this tool was shown to have particularly good reliability and validity in assessing pain during procedures, but the Behavioural Pain Scale is an appropriate alternative.

The Diagnostic Accuracy of Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) in ICU Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The critical care pain observation tool (CPOT) has been widely used to assess pain in ICU patients, and its validity and reliability have been tested in various contexts.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the CPOT in critically ill patients, a systematic review of diagnostic studies was performed.

METHODS

A database search (PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, ProQuest, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, COVIP, CBM) was conducted, as was the manual identification of eligible papers from citations. Eligible studies were published between 2006 and February 2020. Quality appraisal of the studies was carried out with the QUADAS-2 checklist, and data extraction was performed in alignment with STARD 2015. Open Meta Analyst was used for the statistical analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 25 articles involving 1920 subjects with 3493 experimental results were included. Most of the studies were of fair quality. A high degree of heterogeneity (I² = 57.2%, P < 0.001) was discovered. The Youden index values were 1.56 and 1.55 when the CPOT threshold was set at two and three, respectively. The diagnostic performance of the CPOT was affected by the reference standard. The CPOT had a higher diagnostic odds ratio of 11.52 (95% CI: 7.42-17.87) during nociceptive procedures compared with 9.14 (95% CI: 5.38-15.53) at rest or during non-nociceptive procedures.

CONCLUSION

CPOT has moderate diagnostic parameters with a threshold of two or three, suggesting that it is a fair but not excellent tool. More research on the validity of the CPOT in specific subgroups is needed to broaden its applicability in critical care.

A Psychometric Analysis Update of Behavioral Pain Assessment Tools for Noncommunicative, Critically Ill Adults

This is an updated, comprehensive review of the psychometric properties of behavioral pain assessment tools for use with noncommunicative, critically ill adults. Articles were searched in 5 health databases. A total of 106 articles were analyzed, including 54 recently published papers. Nine behavioral pain assessment tools developed for noncommunicative critically ill adults and 4 tools developed for other non-communicative populations were included. The scale development process, reliability, validity, feasibility, and clinical utility were analyzed using a 0 to 20 scoring system, and quality of evidence was also evaluated. The Behavioral Pain Scale, the Behavioral Pain Scale-Nonintubated, and the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool remain the tools with the strongest psychometric properties, with validation testing having been conducted in multiple countries and various languages. Other tools may be good alternatives, but additional research on them is necessary.

Sedation and Delirium in the Intensive Care Unit—A Practice-Based Approach

Introduction: Critically ill patients often require sedation for comfort and to facilitate therapeutic interventions. Sedation practice guidelines provide an evidencebased framework with recommendations that can help improve key sedation-related outcomes. Materials and Methods: We conducted a narrative review of current guidelines and recent trials on sedation. Results: From a practice perspective, current guidelines share many limitations including lack of consensus on the definition of light sedation, optimal frequency of sedation assessment, optimal timing for light sedation and consideration of combinations of sedatives. We proposed several strategies to address these limitations and improve outcomes: 1) early light sedation within the first 48 hours with time-weighted monitoring (overall time spent in light sedation in the first 48 hours—sedation intensity—has a dose-dependent relationship with mortality risk, delirium and time to extubation); 2) provision of analgesia with minimal or no sedation where possible; 3) a goal-directed and balanced multimodal approach that combines the benefits of different agents and minimise their side effects; 4) use of dexmedetomidine and atypical antipsychotics as a sedative-sparing strategy to reduce weaning-related agitation, shorten ventilation time and accelerate physical and cognitive rehabilitation; and 5) a bundled approach to sedation that provides a framework to improve relevant clinical outcomes. Conclusion: More effort is required to develop a practical, time-weighted sedation scoring system. Emphasis on a balanced, multimodal appraoch that targets light sedation from the early phase of acute critical illness is important to achieve optimal sedation, lower mortality, shorten time on ventilator and reduce delirium. Ann Acad Med Singapore;49:215–25 Key words: Analgesia, Benzodiazepine, Critical Care, Dexmedetomidine, Propofol

Pain Assessment in the Patient Unable to Self-Report: Clinical Practice Recommendations in Support of the ASPMN 2019 Position Statement

Pain is a subjective experience, unfortunately, some patients cannot provide a self-report of pain verbally, in writing, or by other means. In patients who are unable to self-report pain, other strategies must be used to infer pain and evaluate interventions. In support of the ASPMN position statement "Pain Assessment in the Patient Unable to Self-Report", this paper provides clinical practice recommendations for five populations in which difficulty communicating pain often exists: neonates, toddlers and young children, persons with intellectual disabilities, critically ill/unconscious patients, older adults with advanced dementia, and patients at the end of life. Nurses are integral to ensuring assessment and treatment of these vulnerable populations.