Validation of critical care pain observation tool in patients hospitalized in surgical wards

Abstract

Background:Application of a reliable and authentic behavioral tool for measuring patients’ pain, hospitalized in intensive care units who are not able to establish relationship, is needed severely. Therefore, this study is conducted with the aim of validating Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) in patients hospitalized in surgical wards.Materials and Methods:CPOT was first translated into Persian and was psychometrically measured in terms of content.Results:It should be noted that the content validity of CPOT was approved by panel of specialists. In addition, validity of this tool was confirmed with high internal cluster correlation (nonpainful procedure (0.997) and painful procedure (0.726). The diagnostic validity was supported with the increased CPOT score during position change and its constancy during the measurement of blood pressure (P < 0.001). Despite higher NRS scores than CPOT, CPOT criterion validity was confirmed due to the correlation between the scores obtained by these two tools (P < 0.001).Conclusions:CPOT is a valid and reliable tool to study pain in patients hospitalized in intensive care units.

Evaluation of Observational and Behavioural Pain Assessment Tools in Nonverbal Intubated Critically Adult Patients after Open - Heart Surgery: A Systematic Review

“…This tool has been reviewed and investigated in 22 studies on 1249 patients in various intensive care units such as medical, surgical, open-heart surgery, and neurosurgery [10], [15], [28], [29], [32], [33], [34], [39], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46], [47], [48], [49], [50], [51], [52], [53].…”

“…The reliability of the tool was examined in 18 studies [28], [29], [32], [33], [34], [39], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [47], [49], [50], [51], [52], [53]. A test-retest procedure was then performed in one study with non-parametric Spearman correlation coefficient of 0.81-0.93, indicating the reliability of the primary test [49].…”

“…inter-rater reliability of the CPOT was found to be lower during patient turning as painful procedures when compared to the BPS (0.90) and NVPS (0.92) [29]. ICC rate was studied in eight studies [32], [33], [42], [43], [44], [49], [52], [53], which was reported in the range of 0.62-0.93, and in the Dutch version of tool, ICC has been recorded in 0.56-0.98 range. In the Danish version, the ICC was also reported to be > 0.90.…”

“…Content validity in the translated version into Turkish [45] was also evaluated by five experts in the field of intensive care using a four-point Likert scale and was reported to be satisfactory. Also, in another study, content validity was approved by experts [52]. In order to investigate the construct validity, changes in average CPOT scores during painful stimulation (repositioning, endotracheal suction) were investigated compared to baseline in the studies, and it was shown that the average CPOT score was significantly increased during painful stimulation (0.48 vs 3.38) [39], [43], [45].…”

Continuing nursing education: use of observational pain assessment tool for diagnosis and management of pain in critically ill patients following training through a social networking app versus lectures

“…This tool measures pain with four indicators, including facial expressions, body movements, muscle tonicity, and ventilator resistance, in critically-ill adult patients under mechanical ventilation and has a minimum score of zero and a maximum of eight. This tool was validated in 2006 by Gelinas et al [ 28 ] and its validity and reliability were confirmed in Iran by Rafiei et al in 2015 [ 29 ].…”