4.5 Article

The Alberta Breakthrough Pain Assessment Tool for cancer patients: A validation study using a Delphi process and patient think-aloud interviews

期刊

JOURNAL OF PAIN AND SYMPTOM MANAGEMENT
卷 35, 期 2, 页码 136-152

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2007.03.016

关键词

cancer pain; breakthrough pain; assessment; instrument development

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Breakthrough pain is a prevalent cancer pain syndrome, and research is needed to identify more effective interventions to manage it. A validated tool to assess breakthrough pain in a standard and reliable manner is urgently needed to support the conduct of clinical trials in breakthrough pain. To address this need, we developed a breakthrough pain assessment tool for research purposes. The current study was undertaken to gather validity evidence for this breakthrough pain assessment tool, using a Delphi process involving an expert panel review, followed by a think-aloud process involving patients with cancer-related breakthrough pain. Two expert panels were formed: a national panel (within Canada; n = 16) and an international panel (including experts from North America, UK, Europe, the Middle East, Australia, and New Zealand; n = 22). Each panel participated in one anonymous surrey round. Response rates were 56% (national panel) and 73% (international panel). The Delphi process revealed substantial consensus on the content of the tool, which increased between rounds of review. The overall level of agreement with the tool, averaged over the four evaluated aspects of all items, was 80% among national panelists and 88% among international panelists. Nine patients completed the think-aloud study. They were able to understand and complete the tool and provided specific direction on its improvement. The validity evidence gathered in this study suggests the Alberta Breakthrough Pain Assessment Tool is conceptually grounded and is understandable by patients and clinicians. Further validation of this tool as an assessment measure within clinical trials research is warranted.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据