Development of the Japanese DOLOPLUS-2: a pain assessment scale for the elderly with Alzheimer's disease

Pain in non-communicative older adults beyond dementia: a narrative review

Aging is associated with an increased risk of developing pain, especially in the presence of concurrent chronic clinical conditions. Similarly, multimorbidity can affect the perception and ability of older adults to appropriately respond to and communicate pain, and there is a clinical heterogeneity in the processing of painful sensations in different neurological conditions. The present narrative review is aimed at assessing the prevalent diseases associated with poor communication and pain in older adults, together with the available diagnostic instruments for the clinical assessment of pain in such a vulnerable population. Dementia was the most described pathology identified in the current literature associated with poor communication in older adults affected by pain, along with Parkinson's disease and stroke. Notably, a common pattern of pain behaviors in these neurological disorders also emerged, indicating potential similarities in the clinical presentation and appropriate diagnostic workout. At the same time, there are many differences in the way patients express their pain according to their main neurological pathology. In addition to this, although a plethora of observation-based tools for pain in patients with dementia have been developed, there is no gold standard, and the clinical utility of such measurements is still largely unaddressed. Meanwhile, there is substantially no standardized observation-based tool for pain in non-communicative patients with Parkinson's disease, and only a few for stroke. Overall, the present narrative review provides an update on the prevalent diseases beyond dementia associated with a communicative disability and a painful condition in older adults.

Chronic pain interference assessment tools for children and adults who are unable to self-report: A systematic review of psychometric properties

AIM

To identify and evaluate psychometric properties of assessment tools for assessing pain interference in children, adolescents, and adults with chronic pain and the inability to self-report.

METHOD

The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022310102). A search was run in MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycInfo (29th March 2022) to identify articles reporting psychometric properties of pain interference assessment tools for children, adolescents, and adults with chronic pain and the inability to objectively self-report pain. Retrieved studies were reviewed by two authors (MGS, LCF) and study quality was assessed using COSMIN.

RESULTS

Psychometric properties of 10 pain interference tools were assessed from 33 studies. The Paediatric Pain Profile (PPP) had low-quality evidence for content validity and internal consistency with children and adolescents who are unable to self-report. No tools for adults had evidence for content validity and internal consistency. No tool had evidence for all nine psychometric properties.

INTERPRETATION

The PPP is recommended for pain interference assessment in children and adolescents with chronic pain and the inability to self-report. Few tools are available for adults. Three tools for children (Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Pediatric Proxy Pain Interference Scale; Bath Adolescent Pain Questionnaire for Parents; modified Brief Pain Inventory-Proxy [mBPI]) and three tools for adults (Doloplus-2; Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Pain Interference Scale-proxy; Brief Pain Inventory-proxy) are promising but require further investigation.

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.

Psychometric evaluation of the Persian version of the Doloplus-2 (P-Doloplus-2) scale in elderly with dementia

Background/aim

A scale for behavioural pain assessment is useful for the detection and determination of pain in the elderly with dementia. This study aimed to translate and evaluate the psychometric properties of Doloplus-2 in the elderly with dementia in Iran.

Materials and methods

In this methodological study, after translation and evaluating the face and content validity of Doloplus-2, 100 elderly people were selected by the convenience sampling method in Kashan, 2018–2019. Exploratory factor analysis, convergent validity, and known-groups comparison were applied to determine construct validity. Reliability was also assessed through internal consistency, equivalence, and stability methods were used. The ceiling and floor effects were also examined. Data were analyzed using the SPSS-v16 and via Mann-Whitney U test, Cronbach’s alpha, Spearman-Brown, and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

Results

The scale’s content validity index was 0.95%, and the item impact of each item was above 1.5. Factor analysis identified 2 “social- functional” and “conventional subjective-objective” factors in scale that altogether were able to explain 76% of the total variance. The results revealed that P-Doloplus-2 could discriminate between the 2 groups of elderly with and without known chronic painful diseases (P < 0.0001). There was a significant positive correlation between P-Doloplus-2 and PACSLAC-II-IR scores (r = 0.878, P < 0.0001). Cronbach’s alpha, ICC, and standard error of measurement for the scale were 0.950, 0.864, and ± 1.759, respectively. The frequency of minimum and maximum possible score of scale was less than 15%.

Conclusion

The Persian version of Doloplus-2 can be considered as a valid and reliable scale for pain assessment in the elderly with dementia.

Measurement properties, feasibility and clinical utility of the Doloplus-2 pain scale in older adults with cognitive impairment: a systematic review

Background

The Doloplus-2 is a pain assessment scale for assessing pain in older adults with cognitive impairment. It is used in clinical practice and research. However, evidence for its measurement properties, feasibility and clinical utility remain incomplete. This systematic review synthesizes previous research on the measurement properties, feasibility and clinical utility of the scale.

Method

We conducted a systematic search in three databases (CINAHL, Medline and PsycINFO) for studies published in English, French, German, Dutch/Flemish or a Scandinavian language between 1990 and April 2017. We also reviewed the Doloplus-2 homepage and reference lists of included studies to supplement our search. Two reviewers independently reviewed titles and abstracts and performed the quality assessment and data abstraction.

Results

A total of 24 studies were included in this systematic review. The quality of the studies varied, but many lacked sufficient detail about the samples and response rates. The Doloplus-2 has been studied using diverse samples in a variety of settings; most study participants were in long-term care and in people with dementia. Sixteen studies addressed various aspects of the scale’s feasibility and clinical utility, but their results are limited and inconsistent across settings and samples. Support for the scale’s reliability, validity and responsiveness varied widely across the studies. Generally, the reliability coefficients reached acceptable benchmarks, but the evidence for different aspects of the scale’s validity and responsiveness was incomplete.

Conclusion

Additional high-quality studies are warranted to determine in which populations of older adults with cognitive impairment the Doloplus-2 is reliable, valid and feasible. The ability of the Doloplus-2 to meaningfully quantify pain, measure treatment response and improve patient outcomes also needs further investigation.

Trial registration

PROSPERO reg. no.: CRD42016049697 registered 20. Oct. 2016.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12877-017-0643-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Effectiveness of the Japanese DOLOPLUS-2: a pain assessment scale for patients with moderate-to-severe dementia

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess whether the Japanese DOLOPLUS-2 scale could effectively identify pain in elderly individuals with moderate-to-severe dementia.

METHODS

This study used a pre-test/post-test design with purposive sampling to select an experimental group and a historical control group. The inclusion criteria were a Functional Assessment Staging score of 5 or 6, a diagnosis of an orthopaedic disease that typically involves pain, the ability to say 'I am currently in pain' (to prevent medication errors), and a total DOLOPLUS-2 scale score ≥5 at the first pain assessment. In the experimental group (n = 19), each patient was assessed by the DOLOPLUS-2 scale at 2PM and 9PM each day for 5 days. If a patient's total score was ≥5, analgesics were prescribed and the patient was re-assessed approximately 3 hours later. In the control group (n = 20), data were collected from medical records over a 1-year period, and we matched the characteristics of the control group to that of the experimental group. We also reviewed nursing records to determine the number of times analgesics had been administered over the 5 days after the nurses had first recorded that the patient had experienced pain.

RESULTS

Among the 19 patients in the experimental group, 15 received pain medication because of a total pain score ≥5. Before treatment, their mean DOLOPLUS-2 scale score was 7.5 ± 3.2, and their score significantly decreased to 2.9 ± 2.1 (P < 0.001) after treatment. The experimental group also received significantly more treatments with analgesic medication than the control group (χ(2) = 16.033, P < 0.001, φ = 0.641).

CONCLUSION

This study's findings suggested that the Japanese DOLOPLUS-2 scale could adequately identify pain in elderly individuals with moderate-to-severe dementia.

Instruments for assessing pain in persons with severe dementia

Through an integrative literature review involving the CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, LILACS, PsycINFO, PubMed databases, tools available in the literature for assessing pain in individuals with severe dementia were identified along with versions validated for use in Brazil. We found 1501 relevant articles which, after selection of abstracts and full reading, yielded a final sample of 33 articles. The analysis enabled the identification of 12 instruments: ABBEY PAIN SCALE; ADD; CNPI; CPAT; DOLOPLUS-2; MOBID and MOBID-2; MPS; NOPPAIN; PACSLAC; PADE; PAINAD and PAINE. Despite the wide variety of tools for assessing pain in individuals with severe dementia worldwide, it was observed that only four are available in Portuguese, of which two are culturally adapted for Brazilian Portuguese (NOPPAIN and PACSLAC) and two validated for Portuguese of Portugal (DOLOPLUS and PAINAD), pointing to the need for further validation of instruments for use in Brazil.

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.

Assessment of people with cognitive impairment and hip fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This study systematically assesses the literature pertaining to the diagnostic test accuracy of assessment instruments to evaluate patients following hip fracture surgery who present with cognitive impairment. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Studies assessing the reliability, validity, sensitivity or specificity of assessment tools for patients following hip fracture who were cognitively impaired were included. An assessment of published (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, AMED, Cochrane library, PEDro) and unpublished/trial registry (OpenGrey, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Current Controlled Trials, the UK National Research Register Archive) databases were undertaken. Methodological quality of the literature was assessed using the QUADAS-2 appraisal tool. Nine studies including 690 participants, with a mean age of 82.1 years were included. The literature demonstrated a high risk of bias for study methodology, but low risk of bias for applicability. Two assessment domains were recognized: pain and delirium. For pain, the Facial Action Coding System (FACS) and DOLOPLUS-2 tools possessed strong inter-rater reliability and internal consistency, with the FACS demonstrating concurrent validity with other pain scales. For delirium, the Delirium Rating Scale-Revisited-98 (DRS-R-98) demonstrated high inter-rater reliability and sensitivity and specificity, with the NEECHAM Confusion Scale possessing high internal consistency. To conclude, there is a paucity of literature assessing the reliability, validity and diagnostic test accuracy of instruments to assess people with cognitive impairment following hip fracture surgery. Based on the current available data, delirium may be best assessed using the NEECHAM Confusion Scale or DRS-R-98. Pain is most accurately evaluated using the FACS.

Feasibility and clinical utility of the Japanese version of the Abbey pain scale in Japanese aged care

Active usage of observational pain scales in Japanese aged-care facilities has not been previously described. Therefore, to examine the feasibility and clinical utility of the Abbey Pain Scale-Japanese version (APS-J), this study examined the interrater reliability of the APS-J among a researcher, nurses, and care workers in aged-care facilities in Japan. This study also aimed to obtain nurses' and care workers' opinions on use of the scale. The following data were collected from 88 residents of two aged-care facilities: demographics, Barthel Index, Folstein Mini-Mental Examination (MMSE), 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15), and APS-J for pain. The researchers, nurses, and care workers independently assessed the residents' pain by using the APS-J, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for interrater reliability and Cronbach alpha for internal consistency were examined. The ICC between researchers and nurses, researchers and care workers, and nurses and care workers were 0.68, 0.74, and 0.76, respectively. Nurses and care workers were invited for focus group interviews to obtain their opinions regarding APS-J use. During these interviews, nurses and care workers stated that the observational points of APS-J subscales were the criteria they normally used to evaluate residents' pain. Several nurses and care workers reported a gap between the estimated pain intensity and APS-J score. Unclear APS-J criteria, difficulties in observing residents, and insufficient practice guidelines were also reported. Our findings indicate that the APS-J has moderate reliability and clinically utility. To facilitate APS-J usage, education and clinical guidelines for pain management may be required for nurses and care workers.

The psychometric properties, feasibility and utility of behavioural-observation methods in pain assessment of cognitively impaired elderly people in acute and long-term care: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The key factor to improving pain management for cognitively impaired elderly patients is accurate pain assessment. Behavioural-observation methods are required for individuals who cannot communicate their pain verbally. A thorough understanding of the key components of behavioural pain assessment and the use of valid and reliable behavioural pain assessment tools would enhance the assessment of pain in this vulnerable population.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the key components involved in behavioural pain assessment in cognitively impaired elderly people and to analyse the reported psychometric properties, feasibility and utility of behavioural pain assessment tools.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies using descriptive, correlation and comparative designs were included.Cognitively impaired elderly people older than 65 years in aged care, acute care or nursing home settings were included.Components measured in behavioural pain assessment; psychometric properties, feasibility and utility of behavioural pain assessment tools used to assess pain in cognitively impaired elderly people in acute or long-term care settings.Identification of behavioural criteria for assessment of pain and investigation of any aspect of the psychometric properties of behavioural pain assessment tools.

SEARCH STRATEGY

An initial limited search of MEDLINE and CINAHL to find published studies between 1990 to 2010 in the English Language was undertaken, following an analysis of the text words contained in the title and abstract. A second search using all identified keywords and index terms was undertaken and extended to a further seven relevant databases. Thirdly, the reference lists of all identified reports and articles were searched for additional studies.

METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY

Studies selected for retrieval were assessed for inclusion by two independent reviewers for methodological validity using the Critical Appraisal Tool for Psychometric Studies adapted from Fallon, Westaway, and Moloney1.

DATA EXTRACTION

Quantitative data were extracted from included studies using the Data Extraction Tool for Psychometric Studies adapted from Fallon, Westaway, and Mahoney1.

DATA SYNTHESIS

As statistical pooling was not possible, evidence in relation to psychometric properties, was analysed and presented in narrative summary.

RESULTS

Twenty three studies were included in the review. No tool has been found suitable for use across both acute and long-term care settings. Nevertheless, three tools show the most promising outcomes and potential for use.

CONCLUSIONS

Although behavioural measures may inform healthcare providers on the presence of pain in an individual, they do not provide information about the aetiology of pain. Hence, pain assessment should not depend solely on behavioural observation conducted using standardised behavioural pain assessment tools, but regarded as an essential component of a multifaceted approach to pain assessment. Clinicians may select tools which show promising qualities and pilot them in their respective clinical settings and populations. In particular, the MPS, the PACSLAC and the PAINAD are recommended for potential use in the cognitively impaired elderly in acute and long-term care settings.Several tools show promise for use in acute or long-term care settings. These tools require tool revisions to strengthen their psychometric properties. Instead of developing new tools, modification of existing tools and conducting further psychometric evaluations on them can provide more evidence of their psychometric properties.