Validation of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Intensity and Brief Pain Inventory During Pregnancy.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING Western Journal of Nursing Research Pub Date : 2025-02-08 DOI:10.1177/01939459251317270
Julie Vignato, Yelena Perkhounkova, Hannah Marilim, Jihye Lee, Maria Hein, Donna Santillan, Mark Santillan
{"title":"Validation of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Intensity and Brief Pain Inventory During Pregnancy.","authors":"Julie Vignato, Yelena Perkhounkova, Hannah Marilim, Jihye Lee, Maria Hein, Donna Santillan, Mark Santillan","doi":"10.1177/01939459251317270","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We sought to (1) validate the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Intensity Short Form 3a measure and Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) for assessing pain during pregnancy and (2) evaluate pain in a sample of pregnant individuals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Pregnant individuals (N = 196) were prospectively surveyed: n = 171 up to 22 weeks gestational age, n = 123 during their third trimester of pregnancy, and n = 98 both times. Additional measures included SPRINT Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Tool, Neurological Quality of Life, Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale and anxiety subscale, and Adverse Childhood Experiences Questionnaire. Validity evidence examined included content validity, reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, and relevant criterion relationships.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Content validity analysis suggests that the PROMIS pain measure was easy to use and interpret while the BPI provided more detail. However, BPI questions regarding medication usage and relief were unclear to some pregnant individuals. In addition, the relationships among pain ratings were stronger than relationships between pain ratings and measures intended to assess other constructs suggesting convergent and discriminant validity. Relationships with relevant criterions were presented for both the PROMIS and BPI by comparing ratings of pain intensity and severity for pregnant individuals with and without areas of pain reported on BPI.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Results indicate that PROMIS and BPI provided valid information on pain intensity or severity for our perinatal sample. Depending on the research question, the PROMIS pain or BPI may be more appropriate to an individual study. Either measure could also be included in an electronic health record for accurate pain assessment in clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":49365,"journal":{"name":"Western Journal of Nursing Research","volume":" ","pages":"1939459251317270"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Western Journal of Nursing Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01939459251317270","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: We sought to (1) validate the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Intensity Short Form 3a measure and Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) for assessing pain during pregnancy and (2) evaluate pain in a sample of pregnant individuals.

Methods: Pregnant individuals (N = 196) were prospectively surveyed: n = 171 up to 22 weeks gestational age, n = 123 during their third trimester of pregnancy, and n = 98 both times. Additional measures included SPRINT Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Tool, Neurological Quality of Life, Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale and anxiety subscale, and Adverse Childhood Experiences Questionnaire. Validity evidence examined included content validity, reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, and relevant criterion relationships.

Results: Content validity analysis suggests that the PROMIS pain measure was easy to use and interpret while the BPI provided more detail. However, BPI questions regarding medication usage and relief were unclear to some pregnant individuals. In addition, the relationships among pain ratings were stronger than relationships between pain ratings and measures intended to assess other constructs suggesting convergent and discriminant validity. Relationships with relevant criterions were presented for both the PROMIS and BPI by comparing ratings of pain intensity and severity for pregnant individuals with and without areas of pain reported on BPI.

Conclusion: Results indicate that PROMIS and BPI provided valid information on pain intensity or severity for our perinatal sample. Depending on the research question, the PROMIS pain or BPI may be more appropriate to an individual study. Either measure could also be included in an electronic health record for accurate pain assessment in clinical settings.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
48
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Western Journal of Nursing Research (WJNR) is a widely read and respected peer-reviewed journal published twelve times a year providing an innovative forum for nurse researchers, students, and clinical practitioners to participate in ongoing scholarly dialogue. WJNR publishes research reports, systematic reviews, methodology papers, and invited special papers. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
期刊最新文献
Symptom Management Research is Still a Valuable Part of Nursing Science. Expanding the Midwest Nursing Research Society's Membership Along with Enhancing Engagement to Foster Successful Organizational Outcomes. Implementing Oncologic Nursing Care Plans in Electronic Health Records With Two Taxonomies: A Pilot Study. Patient Interpretations of Heart Failure Symptom Recognition and Self-Management Using Vignettes: A Pilot Study. Association Between a Family Caregiver's Relationship to Persons With Dementia and Cardiovascular Disease by Race and Ethnicity: A Secondary Analysis of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Data.
×
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