The Norwegian version of the American pain society patient outcome questionnaire: reliability and validity of three subscales

被引:22
作者
Dihle, Alfhild [1 ]
Helseth, Solvi [1 ]
Christophersen, Knut-Andreas [2 ]
机构
[1] Oslo Univ Coll, Fac Nursing, NO-0130 Oslo, Norway
[2] Univ Oslo, Inst Polit Sci, Oslo, Norway
关键词
American Pain Society's Patient Outcome Questionnaire; factor analysis; psychometrics; postoperative pain; reliability;
D O I
10.1111/j.1365-2702.2007.02142.x
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
Aims and objectives. To examine some psychometric properties of the Norwegian version of the American Pain Society's Patient Outcome Questionnaire (APS-POQ-N). Background. This study is part of an investigation of Norwegian orthopaedic surgical patients, where the overall aim is to evaluate the quality of postoperative pain management. Therefore, an adequate questionnaire on the quality of postoperative pain management was needed. Methods. The sample included 114 orthopaedic postoperative patients. The instrument consists of three main subscales, namely the modified Brief Pain Inventory (modified BPI subscale), the subscale on satisfaction with pain management (Satisfaction subscale) and the subscale on beliefs about pain management (Beliefs subscale), together with six single items about pain management. The reliability of these three main subscales was estimated using Cronbach's alpha coefficients and the construct validity was evaluated using principal-axis factor analysis with oblimin rotation. Results. Face and content validity of the APS-POQ-N were satisfactory, while the modified BPI and the Beliefs subscales showed acceptable internal consistency but the Satisfaction subscale did not. Factor analyses yielded a three-factor solution for the modified BPI, a one-factor solution for the Satisfaction subscale and a two-factor solution for the Beliefs subscale. Conclusions. The APS-POQ-N appears, in general, to be an acceptable method of evaluating postoperative pain management in orthopaedic postoperative patients. However, the alpha value of the Satisfaction subscale was low, and thus the subscale is not recommended for this purpose. Relevance to clinical practice. Reliable and valid instruments are important when performing clinical research. This instrument is applicable as an indicator of quality of postoperative pain management in clinical practice and research.
引用
收藏
页码:2070 / 2078
页数:9
相关论文
共 42 条
[1]   Validation of the Malay brief pain inventory questionnaire to measure cancer pain [J].
Aisyaturridha, A ;
Lin, NI ;
Nizar, AJ .
JOURNAL OF PAIN AND SYMPTOM MANAGEMENT, 2006, 31 (01) :13-21
[2]  
[Anonymous], APPL REGRESSION CORR
[3]   Postoperative pain experience: Results from a national survey suggest postoperative pain continues to be undermanaged [J].
Apfelbaum, JL ;
Chen, C ;
Mehta, SS ;
Gan, TJ .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2003, 97 (02) :534-540
[4]   What pain scales do nurses use in the postanaesthesia care unit? [J].
Aubrun, E ;
Paqueron, X ;
Langeron, O ;
Coriat, P ;
Riou, B .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2003, 20 (09) :745-749
[5]   Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures [J].
Beaton, DE ;
Bombardier, C ;
Guillemin, F ;
Ferraz, MB .
SPINE, 2000, 25 (24) :3186-3191
[6]  
BOND M, 1991, P 6 WORLD C PAIN
[7]   A comparison of pain rating scales by sampling from clinical trial data [J].
Breivik, EK ;
Björnsson, GA ;
Skovlund, E .
CLINICAL JOURNAL OF PAIN, 2000, 16 (01) :22-28
[8]   Postoperative pain management: why is it difficult to show that it improves outcome? [J].
Breivik, H .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 1998, 15 (06) :748-751
[9]   A validation study of an Italian version of the brief pain inventory [J].
Caraceni, A ;
Mendoza, TR ;
Meencaglia, E ;
Baratella, C ;
Edwards, K ;
Forjaz, MJ ;
Martini, C ;
Serlin, RC ;
deConno, F ;
Cleeland, CS .
PAIN, 1996, 65 (01) :87-92
[10]  
Crocker L., 2008, INTRO CLASSICAL MODE