Reliability and minimal detectable difference of pressure pain thresholds in a pain-free population.

IF 1.3 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY British Journal of Pain Pub Date : 2023-06-01 Epub Date: 2022-12-23 DOI:10.1177/20494637221147185
Ryan Gl Koh, Tracy M Paul, Karlo Nesovic, Daniel West, Dinesh Kumbhare, Richard D Wilson
{"title":"Reliability and minimal detectable difference of pressure pain thresholds in a pain-free population.","authors":"Ryan Gl Koh, Tracy M Paul, Karlo Nesovic, Daniel West, Dinesh Kumbhare, Richard D Wilson","doi":"10.1177/20494637221147185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The objective of this work was to evaluate the inter-rater and intra-rater reliability and minimal detectable difference (MDD) of pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) in pain-free participants with two examiners over two consecutive days in a cross-sectional study design. Examiners used a standardized method to measure and locate a specific testing site over tibialis anterior for PPT testing with a hand-held algometer. The mean of each examiner's three PPT measurements was used to calculate the intraclass correlation coefficient, inter-rater reliability, and intra-rater reliability. The minimal detectable difference (MDD) was calculated. Eighteen participants were recruited (11 female). The inter-rater reliability was 0.94 and 0.96 on day 1 and day 2, respectively. Intra-rater reliability for the examiners was 0.96 and 0.92 on day 1 and day 2, respectively. The MDD on day 1 was 1.24 kg/cm<sup>2</sup> (CI: 0.76-2.03) and the MDD on day 2 was 0.88 kg/cm<sup>2</sup> (CI: 0.54-1.43). This study demonstrates high inter- and intra-rater reliability and the MDD values for this method of pressure algometry.</p>","PeriodicalId":46585,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Pain","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10278453/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20494637221147185","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The objective of this work was to evaluate the inter-rater and intra-rater reliability and minimal detectable difference (MDD) of pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) in pain-free participants with two examiners over two consecutive days in a cross-sectional study design. Examiners used a standardized method to measure and locate a specific testing site over tibialis anterior for PPT testing with a hand-held algometer. The mean of each examiner's three PPT measurements was used to calculate the intraclass correlation coefficient, inter-rater reliability, and intra-rater reliability. The minimal detectable difference (MDD) was calculated. Eighteen participants were recruited (11 female). The inter-rater reliability was 0.94 and 0.96 on day 1 and day 2, respectively. Intra-rater reliability for the examiners was 0.96 and 0.92 on day 1 and day 2, respectively. The MDD on day 1 was 1.24 kg/cm2 (CI: 0.76-2.03) and the MDD on day 2 was 0.88 kg/cm2 (CI: 0.54-1.43). This study demonstrates high inter- and intra-rater reliability and the MDD values for this method of pressure algometry.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
无痛人群压力痛阈值的可靠性和最小检测差异。
这项研究的目的是在一项横断面研究设计中,评估两名检查者在连续两天内对无痛参试者进行压力痛阈值(PPT)测试的评分者之间和评分者内部的可靠性以及最小可检测到差异(MDD)。检查人员使用标准化方法测量和定位胫骨前方的特定测试部位,并使用手持式压力计进行 PPT 测试。每位考官三次 PPT 测量结果的平均值用于计算类内相关系数、考官间可靠性和考官内部可靠性。同时还计算了最小可检测差异(MDD)。共招募了 18 名参与者(11 名女性)。第 1 天和第 2 天的评分者间信度分别为 0.94 和 0.96。第 1 天和第 2 天的检查者内部信度分别为 0.96 和 0.92。第 1 天的 MDD 为 1.24 kg/cm2(CI:0.76-2.03),第 2 天的 MDD 为 0.88 kg/cm2(CI:0.54-1.43)。这项研究证明了这种压力算法在评分者之间和评分者内部的高度可靠性和 MDD 值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of Pain
British Journal of Pain CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
11.10%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: British Journal of Pain is a peer-reviewed quarterly British journal with an international multidisciplinary Editorial Board. The journal publishes original research and reviews on all major aspects of pain and pain management. Reviews reflect the body of evidence of the topic and are suitable for a multidisciplinary readership. Where empirical evidence is lacking, the reviews reflect the generally held opinions of experts in the field. The Journal has broadened its scope and has become a forum for publishing primary research together with brief reports related to pain and pain interventions. Submissions from all over the world have been published and are welcome. Official journal of the British Pain Society.
期刊最新文献
What influences post-operative opioid requirements for tibial fractures? Botulinum toxin: Should we reconsider its place in the treatment of neuropathic pain? Experience of compassion-based practice in mindfulness for health for individuals with persistent pain. Prehabilitation: The underutilised weapon for chronic pain management. The interaction between psychological factors and conditioned pain modulation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1