Deborah Antcliff, Gareth McCray, Rosa MacKenzie, Janiece Marriott-Smith, Kathryn Cawley, Melanie A Holden
{"title":"Testing the activity pacing questionnaire for validity, reliability and responsiveness: An outcome measure validation study.","authors":"Deborah Antcliff, Gareth McCray, Rosa MacKenzie, Janiece Marriott-Smith, Kathryn Cawley, Melanie A Holden","doi":"10.1016/j.jpain.2025.105568","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Activity pacing aims to manage symptoms of chronic pain and improve function by modifying pain-related behaviours: avoidance, overdoing and overdoing-underdoing cycling. Research regarding the effectiveness of activity pacing is unclear, and hindered by the absence of a validated scale. The previously developed 28-item Activity Pacing Questionnaire (APQ-28) comprises five domains: Activity adjustment, Activity planning, Activity consistency, Activity progression and Activity acceptance. This study aimed to shorten the APQ and provide evidence for its validity, reliability and responsiveness. Paper-based questionnaires collected data from patients with chronic pain attending healthcare services in England, UK, at baseline (n=347), and again at 2-weeks (n=130) and 12-weeks (n=121). Outcome measures included the APQ-28, and other measures of pacing, avoidance, overdoing, pain, self-efficacy, quality of life, physical/mental function, depression and anxiety. Statistical analyses explored validity, reliability, responsiveness and measurement error. Factor analysis (n=347) showed poor model fit for the previous five-factor model, leading to selecting a four-factor model (removing Activity acceptance) with three items per domain, forming the APQ-12 (CFI=0.995, TLI=0.992, RMSEA=0.052, SRMR=0.050). The four domains showed satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.70-0.84) and test-retest reliability (n=130, ICC=0.53-0.64). Only Activity consistency showed significant responsiveness (n=121, Rho=0.27, 95% CI=0.1-0.43). Measurement error of the APQ-12 domains included smallest detectable change (range=1.55-1.76), standard error of measurement (range=0.56-0.63) and minimally important change (range=-0.17-0.33). Confirmatory factor analysis on external data supported the four-domain structure (CFI=0.983, TLI=0.977, RMSEA=0.071, SRMR=0.106). The APQ-12 shows promise as a multi-domain measure of activity pacing for use in clinical practice and future research. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents the psychometric properties of the 12-item Activity Pacing Questionnaire (APQ-12). The APQ-12 provides a multi-domain measure of activity pacing. It has potential clinical and research use to assess changes in activity pacing and explore the effects of activity pacing on symptoms of chronic pain.</p>","PeriodicalId":51095,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain","volume":" ","pages":"105568"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2025.105568","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Activity pacing aims to manage symptoms of chronic pain and improve function by modifying pain-related behaviours: avoidance, overdoing and overdoing-underdoing cycling. Research regarding the effectiveness of activity pacing is unclear, and hindered by the absence of a validated scale. The previously developed 28-item Activity Pacing Questionnaire (APQ-28) comprises five domains: Activity adjustment, Activity planning, Activity consistency, Activity progression and Activity acceptance. This study aimed to shorten the APQ and provide evidence for its validity, reliability and responsiveness. Paper-based questionnaires collected data from patients with chronic pain attending healthcare services in England, UK, at baseline (n=347), and again at 2-weeks (n=130) and 12-weeks (n=121). Outcome measures included the APQ-28, and other measures of pacing, avoidance, overdoing, pain, self-efficacy, quality of life, physical/mental function, depression and anxiety. Statistical analyses explored validity, reliability, responsiveness and measurement error. Factor analysis (n=347) showed poor model fit for the previous five-factor model, leading to selecting a four-factor model (removing Activity acceptance) with three items per domain, forming the APQ-12 (CFI=0.995, TLI=0.992, RMSEA=0.052, SRMR=0.050). The four domains showed satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.70-0.84) and test-retest reliability (n=130, ICC=0.53-0.64). Only Activity consistency showed significant responsiveness (n=121, Rho=0.27, 95% CI=0.1-0.43). Measurement error of the APQ-12 domains included smallest detectable change (range=1.55-1.76), standard error of measurement (range=0.56-0.63) and minimally important change (range=-0.17-0.33). Confirmatory factor analysis on external data supported the four-domain structure (CFI=0.983, TLI=0.977, RMSEA=0.071, SRMR=0.106). The APQ-12 shows promise as a multi-domain measure of activity pacing for use in clinical practice and future research. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents the psychometric properties of the 12-item Activity Pacing Questionnaire (APQ-12). The APQ-12 provides a multi-domain measure of activity pacing. It has potential clinical and research use to assess changes in activity pacing and explore the effects of activity pacing on symptoms of chronic pain.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Pain publishes original articles related to all aspects of pain, including clinical and basic research, patient care, education, and health policy. Articles selected for publication in the Journal are most commonly reports of original clinical research or reports of original basic research. In addition, invited critical reviews, including meta analyses of drugs for pain management, invited commentaries on reviews, and exceptional case studies are published in the Journal. The mission of the Journal is to improve the care of patients in pain by providing a forum for clinical researchers, basic scientists, clinicians, and other health professionals to publish original research.