Defining chronic pain impact levels: a patient-clinician approach using PROMIS® pain interference scores.

IF 2.9 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Karon F Cook, Dokyoung Sophia You, Michael Von Korff, Sean C Mackey
{"title":"Defining chronic pain impact levels: a patient-clinician approach using PROMIS® pain interference scores.","authors":"Karon F Cook, Dokyoung Sophia You, Michael Von Korff, Sean C Mackey","doi":"10.1186/s41687-025-00908-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Our study aims to establish PROMIS Pain Interference score (PI) ranges that clinicians and persons living with chronic pain (PLwCP) associate with none, mild, moderate, and high impact chronic pain. We employed the PRO-Bookmarking technique to identify threshold scores that delineate different levels of chronic pain impact. PROMIS-PI score vignettes or \"score stories\" were developed to communicate the experience of living with different levels of pain interference. A panel of 10 PLwCP and another of 5 pain clinicians identified pairs of score vignettes they judged to represent the threshold between two levels of pain impact (e.g., ''moderate impact\" and ''high impact\"). We defined threshold scores as the mean score of the adjacent vignettes. We applied the obtained threshold scores to the distribution of PROMIS-PI scores in a sample of persons (n = 31,090) seen in a tertiary pain clinic. In another sample, we compared the Bookmarking and the revised Graded Chronic Pain Scale (GCPS-R) classifications. Patients and clinicians were in consensus on threshold scores for \"no impact\" to \"mild impact\" and \"moderate impact\" to \"high impact,\" scores of 47 and 69, respectively. However, for the threshold for \"mild impact to \"moderate impact,\" the value was 65 for patients and 60 for clinicians. The comparison of classifications in the secondary sample revealed differences, especially for the 3rd level, high impact. The GCPS-R classified 58.2% as having high impact chronic pain; the Bookmarking thresholds classified 23.8% as such. The PRO-Bookmarking approach effectively delineated thresholds for classifying levels of chronic pain impact using PROMIS-PI scores. This method incorporates the perspectives of PLwCP and allows for post-hoc application to diverse patient samples.</p>","PeriodicalId":36660,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes","volume":"9 1","pages":"103"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12361012/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-025-00908-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Our study aims to establish PROMIS Pain Interference score (PI) ranges that clinicians and persons living with chronic pain (PLwCP) associate with none, mild, moderate, and high impact chronic pain. We employed the PRO-Bookmarking technique to identify threshold scores that delineate different levels of chronic pain impact. PROMIS-PI score vignettes or "score stories" were developed to communicate the experience of living with different levels of pain interference. A panel of 10 PLwCP and another of 5 pain clinicians identified pairs of score vignettes they judged to represent the threshold between two levels of pain impact (e.g., ''moderate impact" and ''high impact"). We defined threshold scores as the mean score of the adjacent vignettes. We applied the obtained threshold scores to the distribution of PROMIS-PI scores in a sample of persons (n = 31,090) seen in a tertiary pain clinic. In another sample, we compared the Bookmarking and the revised Graded Chronic Pain Scale (GCPS-R) classifications. Patients and clinicians were in consensus on threshold scores for "no impact" to "mild impact" and "moderate impact" to "high impact," scores of 47 and 69, respectively. However, for the threshold for "mild impact to "moderate impact," the value was 65 for patients and 60 for clinicians. The comparison of classifications in the secondary sample revealed differences, especially for the 3rd level, high impact. The GCPS-R classified 58.2% as having high impact chronic pain; the Bookmarking thresholds classified 23.8% as such. The PRO-Bookmarking approach effectively delineated thresholds for classifying levels of chronic pain impact using PROMIS-PI scores. This method incorporates the perspectives of PLwCP and allows for post-hoc application to diverse patient samples.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

定义慢性疼痛影响水平:使用PROMIS®疼痛干扰评分的患者-临床方法。
我们的研究旨在建立临床医生和慢性疼痛患者(PLwCP)与无、轻度、中度和高影响性慢性疼痛相关的PROMIS疼痛干扰评分(PI)范围。我们采用PRO-Bookmarking技术来确定描述不同程度慢性疼痛影响的阈值得分。开发了promise - pi评分小插曲或“评分故事”来交流不同程度的疼痛干扰的生活体验。由10名PLwCP和另外5名疼痛临床医生组成的小组确定了他们认为代表两个疼痛影响水平(例如,“中度影响”和“高影响”)之间阈值的评分小片段对。我们将阈值分数定义为相邻图像的平均分数。我们将获得的阈值评分应用于在三级疼痛诊所就诊的患者样本(n = 31,090)的promise - pi评分分布。在另一个样本中,我们比较了书签和修订的分级慢性疼痛量表(GCPS-R)分类。患者和临床医生在“无影响”到“轻度影响”和“中度影响”到“高影响”的阈值得分上达成共识,分别为47分和69分。然而,对于“轻度影响”到“中度影响”的阈值,患者为65,临床医生为60。二级样本的分类比较显示出差异,特别是对第三级,高影响。GCPS-R将58.2%归类为高影响性慢性疼痛;Bookmarking阈值将23.8%归为此类。PRO-Bookmarking方法使用promise - pi评分有效地描述了慢性疼痛影响分类水平的阈值。该方法结合了PLwCP的观点,并允许对不同患者样本进行事后应用。
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
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes Health Professions-Health Information Management
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
7.40%
发文量
120
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信