Patients' perspective on the chronic pain classification in the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11): results from an international web-based survey.

IF 5.9 1区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
PAIN® Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-02 DOI:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003248
Beatrice Korwisi, Ginea Hay, Patrice Forget, Deirdre Ryan, Rolf-Detlef Treede, Winfried Rief, Antonia Barke
{"title":"Patients' perspective on the chronic pain classification in the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11): results from an international web-based survey.","authors":"Beatrice Korwisi, Ginea Hay, Patrice Forget, Deirdre Ryan, Rolf-Detlef Treede, Winfried Rief, Antonia Barke","doi":"10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003248","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>The 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-11) aims at improving the lives of persons with the lived experience of chronic pain by providing clearly defined and clinically useful diagnoses that can reduce stigma, facilitate communication, and improve access to pain management, among others. The aim of this study was to assess the perspective of people with chronic pain on these diagnoses. An international web-based survey was distributed among persons with the lived experience of chronic pain. After having seen an information video, participants rated the diagnoses on 8 endorsement scales (eg, diagnostic fit, stigma) that ranged from -5 to +5 with 0 representing the neutral point of no expected change. Overall ratings and differences between participants with chronic primary pain (CPP) and chronic secondary pain (CSP) were analyzed. N = 690 participants were included in the data analysis. The ratings on all endorsement scales were significantly higher than the neutral point of 0. The highest ratings were obtained for \"openness\" (2.95 ± 1.93) and \"overall opinion\" (1.87 ± 1.98). Participants with CPP and CSP did not differ in their ratings; however, those with CSP indicated an improved diagnostic fit of the new diagnoses, whereas participants with CPP rated the diagnostic fit of the new diagnoses similar to the fit of their current diagnoses. These results show that persons with the lived experience of chronic pain accept and endorse the new diagnoses. This endorsement is an important indicator of the diagnoses' clinical utility and can contribute to implementation and advocacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":19921,"journal":{"name":"PAIN®","volume":" ","pages":"2356-2363"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PAIN®","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003248","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: The 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-11) aims at improving the lives of persons with the lived experience of chronic pain by providing clearly defined and clinically useful diagnoses that can reduce stigma, facilitate communication, and improve access to pain management, among others. The aim of this study was to assess the perspective of people with chronic pain on these diagnoses. An international web-based survey was distributed among persons with the lived experience of chronic pain. After having seen an information video, participants rated the diagnoses on 8 endorsement scales (eg, diagnostic fit, stigma) that ranged from -5 to +5 with 0 representing the neutral point of no expected change. Overall ratings and differences between participants with chronic primary pain (CPP) and chronic secondary pain (CSP) were analyzed. N = 690 participants were included in the data analysis. The ratings on all endorsement scales were significantly higher than the neutral point of 0. The highest ratings were obtained for "openness" (2.95 ± 1.93) and "overall opinion" (1.87 ± 1.98). Participants with CPP and CSP did not differ in their ratings; however, those with CSP indicated an improved diagnostic fit of the new diagnoses, whereas participants with CPP rated the diagnostic fit of the new diagnoses similar to the fit of their current diagnoses. These results show that persons with the lived experience of chronic pain accept and endorse the new diagnoses. This endorsement is an important indicator of the diagnoses' clinical utility and can contribute to implementation and advocacy.

患者对《国际疾病分类》第 11 版(ICD-11)中慢性疼痛分类的看法:一项国际网络调查的结果。
摘要:第 11 次修订的《国际疾病和相关健康问题分类》(ICD-11)旨在通过提供定义明确且对临床有用的诊断来改善慢性疼痛患者的生活,从而减少耻辱感、促进沟通并改善疼痛治疗的可及性等。本研究旨在评估慢性疼痛患者对这些诊断的看法。我们向有慢性疼痛生活经历的人发放了一份国际网络调查问卷。在观看了一段信息视频后,参与者根据 8 个认可量表(如诊断匹配度、耻辱感)对诊断进行评分,评分范围为 -5 至 +5,0 代表中性点,即没有预期的变化。对总体评分以及慢性原发性疼痛(CPP)和慢性继发性疼痛(CSP)参与者之间的差异进行了分析。数据分析包括 690 名参与者。所有背书量表的评分均明显高于中性点 0。"开放性"(2.95 ± 1.93)和 "总体意见"(1.87 ± 1.98)的评分最高。患有 CPP 和 CSP 的参与者在评分上没有差异;但是,患有 CSP 的参与者表示新诊断的诊断匹配度有所提高,而患有 CPP 的参与者则认为新诊断的诊断匹配度与其当前诊断的匹配度相似。这些结果表明,有慢性疼痛生活经历的人接受并认可新诊断。这种认可是诊断临床实用性的一个重要指标,有助于诊断的实施和宣传。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
PAIN®
PAIN® 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
12.50
自引率
8.10%
发文量
242
审稿时长
9 months
期刊介绍: PAIN® is the official publication of the International Association for the Study of Pain and publishes original research on the nature,mechanisms and treatment of pain.PAIN® provides a forum for the dissemination of research in the basic and clinical sciences of multidisciplinary interest.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信