豚鼠疼痛量表的开发与验证

IF 0.5 4区 农林科学 Q4 VETERINARY SCIENCES Journal of Exotic Pet Medicine Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1053/j.jepm.2024.06.002
Floriane Benedetti , Charly Pignon , Patricia Muffat-es-Jacques , Caroline Gilbert , Loïc Desquilbet
{"title":"豚鼠疼痛量表的开发与验证","authors":"Floriane Benedetti ,&nbsp;Charly Pignon ,&nbsp;Patricia Muffat-es-Jacques ,&nbsp;Caroline Gilbert ,&nbsp;Loïc Desquilbet","doi":"10.1053/j.jepm.2024.06.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>This study aimed to develop and validate a pain assessment scale for guinea pigs to be performed in clinics by veterinarians. The scale was established using pre-existing pain scales from other species and was based on signs expressed by guinea pigs in pain already identified in the literature. The scale consists of 14 descriptors grouped into 4 categories: appearance, functional, physiological, and behavioral. Each item on the scale was assigned a score based on the observation and handling of the animals. The total score obtained ranged from 0 to 26, with more intense pain scoring higher.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Fifty-eight adult guinea pigs presenting at the authors' Teaching Hospital between March 2021 and November 2022 were assessed. Guinea pigs were filmed during their consultation and an information sheet was completed. The information sheet provided details on the animals' appetite, fecal production, and behavior at home. The videos and corresponding information sheets were then reviewed to attribute a pain score to each animal. The pain scores were measured twice by a same observer 1 month apart to assess repeatability and by a second observer to assess reproducibility. The validity was assessed by correlating the pain scores given by the novel scale with scores using a numerical rating scale (NRS) as a gold standard method.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The initial Cronbach's alpha obtained was 0.77, which was satisfactory. However, it highlighted that items concerning pruritus and spasmodic movements should be deleted to strengthen internal consistency. Then, Lin's coefficient and Bland and Altman's graphical method highlighted that the scale had an almost strong repeatability and intra-operator reproducibility. Moreover, the correlation between pain intensities obtained with the novel scale and the scores given using NRS was correct (Kappa = 0.72). The specificity was 87.5%, but the sensitivity of the scale was 52.0%. Each item's repeatability and reproducibility were assessed to identify items that would benefit from added clarification.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Our work is the first step in establishing a pain scale in guinea pigs. However, it should not yet be used in a clinical context. Indeed, the scale was not good at detecting pain when a guinea pig was actually painful. Further studies, including improvement of certain items and testing a larger sample of animals, are ongoing.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15801,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Exotic Pet Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155750632400079X/pdfft?md5=4f5612dc08dc0a9486a35d6c728a0f6e&pid=1-s2.0-S155750632400079X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development and validation of a pain scale in guinea pig\",\"authors\":\"Floriane Benedetti ,&nbsp;Charly Pignon ,&nbsp;Patricia Muffat-es-Jacques ,&nbsp;Caroline Gilbert ,&nbsp;Loïc Desquilbet\",\"doi\":\"10.1053/j.jepm.2024.06.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>This study aimed to develop and validate a pain assessment scale for guinea pigs to be performed in clinics by veterinarians. The scale was established using pre-existing pain scales from other species and was based on signs expressed by guinea pigs in pain already identified in the literature. The scale consists of 14 descriptors grouped into 4 categories: appearance, functional, physiological, and behavioral. Each item on the scale was assigned a score based on the observation and handling of the animals. The total score obtained ranged from 0 to 26, with more intense pain scoring higher.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Fifty-eight adult guinea pigs presenting at the authors' Teaching Hospital between March 2021 and November 2022 were assessed. Guinea pigs were filmed during their consultation and an information sheet was completed. The information sheet provided details on the animals' appetite, fecal production, and behavior at home. The videos and corresponding information sheets were then reviewed to attribute a pain score to each animal. The pain scores were measured twice by a same observer 1 month apart to assess repeatability and by a second observer to assess reproducibility. The validity was assessed by correlating the pain scores given by the novel scale with scores using a numerical rating scale (NRS) as a gold standard method.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The initial Cronbach's alpha obtained was 0.77, which was satisfactory. However, it highlighted that items concerning pruritus and spasmodic movements should be deleted to strengthen internal consistency. Then, Lin's coefficient and Bland and Altman's graphical method highlighted that the scale had an almost strong repeatability and intra-operator reproducibility. Moreover, the correlation between pain intensities obtained with the novel scale and the scores given using NRS was correct (Kappa = 0.72). The specificity was 87.5%, but the sensitivity of the scale was 52.0%. Each item's repeatability and reproducibility were assessed to identify items that would benefit from added clarification.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Our work is the first step in establishing a pain scale in guinea pigs. However, it should not yet be used in a clinical context. Indeed, the scale was not good at detecting pain when a guinea pig was actually painful. Further studies, including improvement of certain items and testing a larger sample of animals, are ongoing.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15801,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Exotic Pet Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155750632400079X/pdfft?md5=4f5612dc08dc0a9486a35d6c728a0f6e&pid=1-s2.0-S155750632400079X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Exotic Pet Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155750632400079X\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Exotic Pet Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155750632400079X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景本研究旨在开发和验证一种豚鼠疼痛评估量表,供兽医在诊所使用。该量表采用了其他物种已有的疼痛量表,并以文献中已确定的豚鼠疼痛时的体征为基础。该量表由 14 个描述项组成,分为 4 个类别:外观、功能、生理和行为。量表中的每个项目都根据对动物的观察和处理进行评分。方法对 2021 年 3 月至 2022 年 11 月期间在作者教学医院就诊的 58 只成年豚鼠进行了评估。在豚鼠就诊期间对其进行了拍摄,并填写了一份信息表。信息表详细介绍了豚鼠的食欲、排泄物和在家中的行为。然后对视频和相应的信息表进行审核,为每只动物进行疼痛评分。疼痛评分由同一观察者测量两次,每次间隔 1 个月,以评估重复性,并由第二位观察者评估再现性。将新量表给出的疼痛评分与作为金标准方法的数字评分量表(NRS)的评分进行相关性分析,以评估其有效性。然而,它强调应删除有关瘙痒和痉挛性运动的项目,以加强内部一致性。然后,Lin 系数和 Bland 与 Altman 图解法表明,量表具有几乎很强的重复性和操作者内部的再现性。此外,使用新量表获得的疼痛强度与使用 NRS 给出的分数之间的相关性是正确的(Kappa = 0.72)。该量表的特异性为 87.5%,灵敏度为 52.0%。我们对每个项目的重复性和再现性进行了评估,以确定哪些项目需要进一步说明。我们的工作是在豚鼠中建立疼痛量表的第一步,但它还不能用于临床。事实上,当豚鼠实际感到疼痛时,该量表并不能很好地检测出疼痛。进一步的研究还在进行中,包括改进某些项目和测试更多的动物样本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Development and validation of a pain scale in guinea pig

Background

This study aimed to develop and validate a pain assessment scale for guinea pigs to be performed in clinics by veterinarians. The scale was established using pre-existing pain scales from other species and was based on signs expressed by guinea pigs in pain already identified in the literature. The scale consists of 14 descriptors grouped into 4 categories: appearance, functional, physiological, and behavioral. Each item on the scale was assigned a score based on the observation and handling of the animals. The total score obtained ranged from 0 to 26, with more intense pain scoring higher.

Methods

Fifty-eight adult guinea pigs presenting at the authors' Teaching Hospital between March 2021 and November 2022 were assessed. Guinea pigs were filmed during their consultation and an information sheet was completed. The information sheet provided details on the animals' appetite, fecal production, and behavior at home. The videos and corresponding information sheets were then reviewed to attribute a pain score to each animal. The pain scores were measured twice by a same observer 1 month apart to assess repeatability and by a second observer to assess reproducibility. The validity was assessed by correlating the pain scores given by the novel scale with scores using a numerical rating scale (NRS) as a gold standard method.

Results

The initial Cronbach's alpha obtained was 0.77, which was satisfactory. However, it highlighted that items concerning pruritus and spasmodic movements should be deleted to strengthen internal consistency. Then, Lin's coefficient and Bland and Altman's graphical method highlighted that the scale had an almost strong repeatability and intra-operator reproducibility. Moreover, the correlation between pain intensities obtained with the novel scale and the scores given using NRS was correct (Kappa = 0.72). The specificity was 87.5%, but the sensitivity of the scale was 52.0%. Each item's repeatability and reproducibility were assessed to identify items that would benefit from added clarification.

Conclusion

Our work is the first step in establishing a pain scale in guinea pigs. However, it should not yet be used in a clinical context. Indeed, the scale was not good at detecting pain when a guinea pig was actually painful. Further studies, including improvement of certain items and testing a larger sample of animals, are ongoing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Exotic Pet Medicine
Journal of Exotic Pet Medicine 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
65
审稿时长
60 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Exotic Pet Medicine provides clinicians with a convenient, comprehensive, "must have" resource to enhance and elevate their expertise with exotic pet medicine. Each issue contains wide ranging peer-reviewed articles that cover many of the current and novel topics important to clinicians caring for exotic pets. Diagnostic challenges, consensus articles and selected review articles are also included to help keep veterinarians up to date on issues affecting their practice. In addition, the Journal of Exotic Pet Medicine serves as the official publication of both the Association of Exotic Mammal Veterinarians (AEMV) and the European Association of Avian Veterinarians (EAAV). The Journal of Exotic Pet Medicine is the most complete resource for practitioners who treat exotic pets.
期刊最新文献
Determination of a plasma retinol reference interval in eastern collared lizards (Crotaphytus collaris) Effects of oral capromorelin on food intake and body weight in healthy, four-toed hedgehogs (Atelerix albiventris) Abstracts from the literature Avian & Exotic News
×
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