The psychometric assessment of the older adult in pain: A systematic review of assessment instruments.

IF 4.1 3区 医学 Q2 BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
Andrew I G McLennan, Emily M Winters, Michelle M Gagnon, Thomas Hadjistavropoulos
{"title":"The psychometric assessment of the older adult in pain: A systematic review of assessment instruments.","authors":"Andrew I G McLennan, Emily M Winters, Michelle M Gagnon, Thomas Hadjistavropoulos","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102513","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We conducted a systematic review of pain assessment tools suitable for community-dwelling older adults. For this work, we conceptualized existing psychometric tools as falling under the following domains: a) pain intensity/characteristics; b) pain-related interference/disability; c) coping strategies; d) pain beliefs/attitudes/cognitions; e) pain-related fear and anxiety; and f) pain-specific emotional distress. Multi-dimensional and condition-specific tools were also considered. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures guided the evaluation of measurement properties, quality of evidence ratings, and recommendations for each measure. A search of Medline, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, yielded a total of 21,755 records. Of these, 120 studies, focusing on 57 psychometric tools, were included in this review and categorized into the aforementioned pain assessment domains. The availability of psychometric studies with older adult populations was insufficient for most tools and the quality of evidence ranged from very low to high. Only a small number of tools met the criteria for a strong or tentative recommendation favoring their use. We identified gaps that should be addressed in future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":13,"journal":{"name":"ACS Chemical Neuroscience","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Chemical Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102513","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We conducted a systematic review of pain assessment tools suitable for community-dwelling older adults. For this work, we conceptualized existing psychometric tools as falling under the following domains: a) pain intensity/characteristics; b) pain-related interference/disability; c) coping strategies; d) pain beliefs/attitudes/cognitions; e) pain-related fear and anxiety; and f) pain-specific emotional distress. Multi-dimensional and condition-specific tools were also considered. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures guided the evaluation of measurement properties, quality of evidence ratings, and recommendations for each measure. A search of Medline, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, yielded a total of 21,755 records. Of these, 120 studies, focusing on 57 psychometric tools, were included in this review and categorized into the aforementioned pain assessment domains. The availability of psychometric studies with older adult populations was insufficient for most tools and the quality of evidence ranged from very low to high. Only a small number of tools met the criteria for a strong or tentative recommendation favoring their use. We identified gaps that should be addressed in future research.

老年人疼痛心理评估:对评估工具的系统回顾。
我们对适用于社区老年人的疼痛评估工具进行了系统回顾。在这项工作中,我们将现有的心理测量工具归纳为以下几个领域:a) 疼痛强度/特征;b) 与疼痛相关的干扰/残疾;c) 应对策略;d) 疼痛信念/态度/认知;e) 与疼痛相关的恐惧和焦虑;f) 与疼痛相关的情绪困扰。此外,还考虑了多维工具和针对特定病症的工具。基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准(COSMIN)方法用于对患者报告的结果测量方法进行系统性回顾,指导对每种测量方法的测量特性、证据质量评级和建议进行评估。通过对 Medline、PsycINFO、Web of Science 和 Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature 的检索,共获得 21,755 条记录。其中有 120 项研究被纳入本综述,这些研究主要涉及 57 种心理测量工具,并按上述疼痛评估领域进行了分类。对于大多数工具而言,针对老年人群的心理测量研究并不充分,证据质量从很低到很高不等。只有少数工具符合强烈推荐或暂定推荐使用的标准。我们发现了未来研究中需要解决的不足之处。
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
ACS Chemical Neuroscience
ACS Chemical Neuroscience BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY-CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
4.00%
发文量
323
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: ACS Chemical Neuroscience publishes high-quality research articles and reviews that showcase chemical, quantitative biological, biophysical and bioengineering approaches to the understanding of the nervous system and to the development of new treatments for neurological disorders. Research in the journal focuses on aspects of chemical neurobiology and bio-neurochemistry such as the following: Neurotransmitters and receptors Neuropharmaceuticals and therapeutics Neural development—Plasticity, and degeneration Chemical, physical, and computational methods in neuroscience Neuronal diseases—basis, detection, and treatment Mechanism of aging, learning, memory and behavior Pain and sensory processing Neurotoxins Neuroscience-inspired bioengineering Development of methods in chemical neurobiology Neuroimaging agents and technologies Animal models for central nervous system diseases Behavioral research
×
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