2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.pmn.2018.09.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Psychometric Properties of the Behavioral Pain Scale in Traumatic Brain Injury

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
7
0
2

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
7
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Specifically developed for ICU patients unable to self-report, the Behavioral Pain Scale or BPS (Payen et al, 2001) and the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) by Gélinas, Fillion, Puntillo, Viens, & Fortier (2006) were tested in brain-injured ICU patients . A low effect size was found for the facial expression item of the BPS (Ribeiro et al, 2019) and a grimace score of 2 and muscle rigidity score of 2 on the CPOT were not frequently observed (Joffe, McNulty, Boitor, Marsh, & Gélinas, 2016) raising attention about suitability of these items in this specific ICU population. In alignment with these findings, recent evidence has shown that braininjured ICU patients express unique behaviors (Arbour et al, 2014;Roulin & Ramelet, 2014), and guidelines highlighted the need to revise behavioral pain scales to make their content more suitable to these patients (Barr et al, 2013;Devlin et al, 2018).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Specifically developed for ICU patients unable to self-report, the Behavioral Pain Scale or BPS (Payen et al, 2001) and the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) by Gélinas, Fillion, Puntillo, Viens, & Fortier (2006) were tested in brain-injured ICU patients . A low effect size was found for the facial expression item of the BPS (Ribeiro et al, 2019) and a grimace score of 2 and muscle rigidity score of 2 on the CPOT were not frequently observed (Joffe, McNulty, Boitor, Marsh, & Gélinas, 2016) raising attention about suitability of these items in this specific ICU population. In alignment with these findings, recent evidence has shown that braininjured ICU patients express unique behaviors (Arbour et al, 2014;Roulin & Ramelet, 2014), and guidelines highlighted the need to revise behavioral pain scales to make their content more suitable to these patients (Barr et al, 2013;Devlin et al, 2018).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…In another study, Ribeiro and coworkers have studied psychometric properties of the BPS in traumatic brain injury. They found that BPS had good internal consistency, good discriminant validity, moderate to excellent reliability, and high responsiveness, but also that deep sedation affected the increase of grading during painful procedures (24).…”
Section: Pain Assessment Tools and Patients With Altered Mental Statusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Currently, none of the above rating scales can be considered the gold standard for pain assessment in neurocritical patients. As with other ICU patients, pain should be routinely assessed using validated behavioral scales and documented, especially before invasive procedures and physical therapy (24).…”
Section: Pain Assessment Tools and Patients With Altered Mental Statusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The recent clinical practice guidelines from the Society of Critical Care Medicine (2018) recommend the use of the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS; Payen et al, 2001) and the Critical-care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT;G elinas et al, 2006) to assess pain for nonverbal patients, considering reliability, validity, and feasibility (Devlin et al, 2018). Accordingly, the validity of BPS (Dehghani et al, 2014;Ribeiro et al, 2019) and CPOT (Joffe et al, 2016;Sulla et al, 2017) has been examined in brain-injured patients. Their discriminative validities were supported by observing the total scores on both scales during nociceptive procedures compared with non-nociceptive procedures.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Their discriminative validities were supported by observing the total scores on both scales during nociceptive procedures compared with non-nociceptive procedures. Specific behavioral pain indicators (e.g., facial expression and muscle tension) are less observed in brain-injured patients (Joffe et al, 2016;Ribeiro et al, 2019) compared with other nonverbal patients (Chanques et al, 2009;Payen et al, 2001). Additionally, unlike in nonebraininjured patients, atypical behavioral pain responses such as flushing and sudden eye opening were observed in brain-injured patients according to the patient's level of consciousness (Arbour, et al, 2014b;G elinas et al, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%