Numeric rating scale for pain should be used in an ordinal but not interval manner. A retrospective analysis of 346,892 patient reports of the quality improvement in postoperative pain treatment registry.
Journal
Pain
ISSN: 1872-6623
Titre abrégé: Pain
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7508686
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 Oct 2023
18 Oct 2023
Historique:
received:
10
02
2023
accepted:
01
08
2023
medline:
18
10
2023
pubmed:
18
10
2023
entrez:
18
10
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
To assess postoperative pain intensity in adults, the numeric rating scale (NRS) is used. This scale has shown acceptable psychometric features, although its scale properties need further examination. We aimed to evaluate scale properties of the NRS using an item response theory (IRT) approach. Data from an international postoperative pain registry (QUIPS) was analyzed retrospectively. Overall, 346,892 adult patients (age groups: 18-20 years: 1.6%, 21-30 years: 6.7%, 31-40 years: 8.3%, 41-50 years: 13.2%, 51-60 years: 17.1%, 61-70 years: 17.3%, 71-80 years: 16.4%, 81-90 years: 3.9%, >90: 0.2%) were included. Among the patients, 55.7% are female and 38% had preoperative pain. Three pain items (movement pain, worst pain, least pain) were analyzed using 4 different IRT models: partial credit model (PCM), generalized partial credit model (GPCM), rating scale model (RSM), and graded response model (GRM). Fit indices were compared to decide the best fitting model (lower fit indices indicate a better model fit). Subgroup analyses were done for sex and age groups. After collapsing the highest and the second highest response category, the GRM outperformed other models (lowest Bayesian information criterion) in all subgroups. Overlapping categories were found in category boundary curves for worst and minimum pain and particularly for higher pain ratings. Response category widths differed depending on pain intensity. For female, male, and age groups, similar results were obtained. Response categories on the NRS are ordered but have different widths. The interval scale properties of the NRS should be questioned. In dealing with missing linearity in pain intensity ratings using the NRS, IRT methods may be helpful.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37851363
doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003078
pii: 00006396-990000000-00426
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 International Association for the Study of Pain.
Références
Alghadir AH, Anwer S, Iqbal A, Iqbal ZA. Test-retest reliability, validity, and minimum detectable change of visual analog, numerical rating, and verbal rating scales for measurement of osteoarthritic knee pain. J Pain Res 2018;11:851–6.
Alghadir AH, Anwer S, Iqbal ZA. The psychometric properties of an Arabic numeric pain rating scale for measuring osteoarthritis knee pain. Disabil Rehabil 2016;38:2392–7.
Alwin DF. Information transmission in the survey interview: number of response categories and the reliability of attitude measurement. Sociological Methodol 1992;22:83–118.
Andrich DA. A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika 1978;43:561–73.
Atisook R, Euasobhon P, Saengsanon A, Jensen MP. Validity and utility of four pain intensity measures for use in international research. J Pain Res 2021;14:1129–39.
Avian A, Messerer B, Frey A, Meissner W, Weinberg A, Ravekes W, Berghold A. Scaling properties of pain intensity ratings in paediatric populations using the Faces Pain Scale-revised: secondary analyses of published data based on the item response theory. Int J Nurs Stud 2018;87:49–59.
Avian A, Stijic M, Messerer B, Meißner W. Datasets consisting of three pain items (worst pain, movement pain, least pain) [Internet]. PsychArchives, 2023. doi: 10.23668/psycharchives.13017.
Avian A, Stijic M, Messerer B, Meißner W. R-Code to analyze three pain items (movement pain, worst pain, least pain) [Internet]. PsychArchives, 2023. doi: 10.23668/psycharchives.13018.
Bahreini M, Jalili M, Moradi-Lakeh M. A comparison of three self-report pain scales in adults with acute pain. J Emerg Med 2015;48:10–18.
Bates D, Schultheis BC, Hanes MC, Jolly SM, Chakravarthy KV, Deer TR, Levy RM, Hunter CW. A comprehensive algorithm for management of neuropathic pain. Pain Med 2019;20(suppl 1):S2–12.
Bloom M, Fischer J, Orme JG. Evaluating practice: guidelines for the accountable professional. 4th ed. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2003.
Cepeda SM, Africano JM, Polo R, Alcala R, Carr DB. What decline in pain intensity is meaningful to patients with acute pain? PAIN 2003;105:151–7.
Chalmers RP. The mirt package: multidimensional item response theory. Library of the R package, 2017. Available at: www.cran.r.project.org/web/packages/mirt/mirt.pdf.
Chalmers RP. The mirt package: multidimensional item response theory. Library of the R package, 2017. Available at: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/mirt/mirt.pdf. Accessed March 5, 2017.
Clark ME, Gironda RJ, Young RW. Development and validation of the pain outcomes questionnaire-VA. J Rehabil Res Develop 2003;40:381–95.
de Leeuw ED. Choosing the method of data collection. In: de Leeuw ED, Hox JJ, Dillman DA, editors. International handbook of survey methodology. New York: Pschological Press, 2008. p. 113–21.
Deshields TL, Tait RC, Gfeller JD, Chibnall JT. Relationship between social desirability and self report in chronic pain patients. Clin J Pain 1995;11:189–93.
Evans KR, Sills T, DeBrota DJ, Gelwicks S, Engelhardt N, Santor D. An item response analysis of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale using shared data from two pharmaceutical companies. J Psychiatr Res 2004;38:275–84.
Fox MT, Sidani S, Streiner D. Using standardized survey items with older adults hospitalized for chronic illness. Res Nurs Health 2007;30:468–81.
Gabes M, Zeidler C, Ständer S, Chen SC, Apfelbacher CJ. Refinement and validation of the ItchyQoL using classical test theory and item response theory resulted in a reduction of the response categories from a 5-point to a 3-point scale. Br J Dermatol 2021;185:548–54.
Gagliese L, Weizblit N, Ellis W, Chan VWS. The measurement of postoperative pain: a comparison of intensity scales in younger and older surgical patients. PAIN 2005;117:412–20.
Garratt AM, Helgeland J, Gulbrandsen P. Five-point scales outperform 10- point scales in a randomized comparison of item scaling for the Patient Experiences Questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:200–7.
Hendriks AA, Vrielink MR, van Es SQ, De Haes HJ, Smets EM. Assessing inpatients' satisfaction with hospital care: should we prefer evaluation or satisfaction ratings? Patient Educ Couns 2004;55:142–6.
Hjermstad MJ, Fayers PM, Haugen DF, Caraceni A, Hanks GW, Loge JH, Fainsinger R, Aass N, Kaasa S. Studies comparing numerical rating scales, verbal rating scales, and visual analogue scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature review. J Pain Symptom Manag 2011;41:1073–93.
Konstantinou K, Lewis M, Dunn KM, Ogollah R, Artus M, Hill JC, Hughes G, Robinson M, Saunders B, Bartlam B, Kigozi J, Jowett S, Mallen CD, Hay EM, van der Windt DA, Foster NE. Stratified care versus usual care for management of patients presenting with sciatica in primary care (SCOPiC): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Rheumatol 2020;2:e401–11.
Khadka J, Gothwal VK, McAlinden C, Lamoureux EL, Pesudovs K. The importance of rating scales in measuring patient-reported outcomes. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2012;10:80.
Kutschar P, Weichbold M, Osterbrink J. Effects of age and cognitive function on data quality of standardized surveys in nursing home populations. BMC Geriatr 2019;19:244.
Lazaridou A, Elbaridi N, Edwards RR, Berde CB. Chapter 5—pain assessment. In: Benzon HT, Raja SN, Liu SS, Fishman SM, Cohen SP, editors. Essentials of pain medicine. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier, 2018. p. 39–46.
Li L, Liu X, Herr K. Postoperative pain intensity assessment: a comparison of four scales in Chinese adults. Pain Med 2007;8:223–34.
Lietz P. Research into questionnaire design: a summary of the literature. Int J Market Res 2010;52:249–72.
Massof RW. Likert and Guttman scaling of visual function rating scale questionnaires. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2004;11:381–99.
Meißner W, Komann M, Erlenwein J, Stamer U, Scherag A. The quality of postoperative pain therapy in German hospitals. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2017;114:161–7.
Messerer B, Gutmann A, Weinberg A, Sandner-Kiesling A. Implementation of a standardized pain management in a pediatric surgery unit. Pediatr Surg Int 2010;26:879–89.
Mintken PE, Glynn P, Cleland JA. Psychometric properties of the shortened disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand questionnaire (QuickDASH) and numeric pain rating scale in patients with shoulder pain. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2009;18:920–6.
Muraki E. A generalized partial credit model: application of an EM algorithm. Appl Psychol Meas 1992;16:159–76.
Price DD, McGrath PA, Rafii A, Buckingham B. The validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale measures for chronic and experimental pain. PAIN 1983;17:45–56.
Raja SN, Carr DB, Cohen M, Finnerup NB, Flor H, Gibson S, Keefe FJ, Mogil JS, Ringkamp M, Sluka KA, Song XJ, Stevens B, Sullivan MD, Tutelman PR, Ushida T, Vader K. The revised International Association for the Study of Pain definition of pain: concepts, challenges, and compromises. PAIN 2020;161:1976–82.
Rasch G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Studies in mathematical psychology. Copenhagen: Danmarks Paedagogiske Institut, 1960.
Rodriguez CS, McMillan S, Yarandi H. Pain measurement in older adults with head and neck cancer and communication impairments. Cancer Nurs 2004;27:425–33.
Şahin A, Anıl D. The effects of test length and sample size on item parameters in item response theory. Educ Sci Theor Pract 2017;17:321–35.
Saltychev M, Vastamäki H, Mattie R, McCormick Z, Vastamäki M, Laimi K. Psychometric properties of the pain numeric rating scale when applied to multiple body regions among professional musicians. PLoS One 2016;11:e0161874.
Schoeffel D, Casser HR, Bach M, Kress HG, Likar R, Locher H, Steinleitner W, Strohmeier M, Brunner H, Treede RD, Zieglgänsberger W, Sandkühler J. Risk assessment in pain therapy. Schmerz 2008;22:594–603.
Sijtsma K. Item response theory. In: Lewis-beck M, Bryman AE, Liao TF, editors. The Sage encyclopedia in social science research methods. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage, 2004. p. 529–33.
Silverberg JI, DeLozier A, Sun L, Thyssen JP, Kim B, Yosipovitch G, Nunes FP, Gugiu PC, Doll HA, Eichenfield LF. Psychometric properties of the itch numeric rating scale, skin pain numeric rating scale, and atopic dermatitis sleep scale in adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2021;19:247.
Williamson A, Hoggart B. Pain: a review of three commonly used pain rating scales. J Clin Nurs 2005;14:798–804.
Wright B, Mok MMC. An overview of the family of rasch measurement models. In: Smith EV Jr, Smith RM, editors. Introduction to rasch measurement: theory, models and applications. Maple Grove, MN: JAM Press, 2004. p. 1–24.
Young IA, Dunning J, Butts R, Cleland JA, Fernández-de-Las-Peñas C. Psychometric properties of the numeric pain rating scale and neck disability index in patients with cervicogenic headache. Cephalalgia 2019;39:44–51.