4.4 Article

Validation of the University of California San Francisco Oral Cancer Pain Questionnaire

期刊

JOURNAL OF PAIN
卷 8, 期 12, 页码 950-953

出版社

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2007.06.012

关键词

oral cancer; cancer pain; quality of life; questionnaire; validation

资金

  1. NIDCR NIH HHS [DE 14609, K12 DE014609-03, K12 DE014609] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to validate the published University of California San Francisco (UCSF) Oral Cancer Pain Questionnaire. To test for validity of the questionnaire, 16 patients with oral cancer completed the 8-item questionnaire immediately before and after treatment (surgical resection) of their oral cancer. For all 8 questions, the difference between mean preoperative and mean postoperative responses were statistically significant (P <.05), confirming the validity of the questionnaire to measure oral cancer pain. Internal consistency of the questionnaire was evaluated by using Cronbach's alpha, which provides an estimate of reliability based on all correlations between the items (questions) of the instrument (questionnaire). In the oral cancer pain questionnaire, questions 1, 3, and 5 evaluate the intensity, sharpness, and throbbing nature of pain when the patient is not engaged in oral function (talking, eating, and drinking). Questions 2, 4, and 6 measure the intensity, sharpness, and throbbing nature of pain during oral function. Cronbach's alpha for questions 1, 3, and 5 is 0.87 and Cronbach's alpha for questions 2, 4, and 6 is 0.94; values greater than 0.7 indicate reliability. In this study, we have validated the UCSF Oral Cancer Pain Questionnaire as an effective tool in quantifying pain from oral cancer. Perspective: The study validates an oral cancer pain questionnaire. The questionnaire can be used to reliably measure pain levels before and after surgical resection in patients with oral cancer. (c) 2007 by the American Pain Society.

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

4.4
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