COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
VALIDATION STUDIES
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Validity of parent ratings as proxy measures of pain in children with cognitive impairment.

Parent-assigned pain scores have been used as proxy measures of pain for children, such as those with cognitive impairment (CI), who cannot self-report. However, the accuracy of parent-assigned pain ratings for children with CI has not been studied. This study evaluated the construct and criterion validity of parental pain scores of children with CI. Fifty-two children aged 4 to 19 years with CI and their parents/guardians were included in this observational study. Children were observed and assessed for pain by parents using the Faces, Legs, Activity, Cry, and Consolability (FLACC) observational tool and the 0 to 10 Numbers Scale, and simultaneously by nurses using the FLACC. Children who were cognitively able scored pain using simplified scales. Parent scores decreased after analgesic administration (6.4 +/- 2.5 vs. 3.1 +/- 2.3; p = .004), supporting their construct validity. Parents' FLACC and Numbers ratings correlated well with nurse ratings (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.78 [confidence interval = 0.63-0.87] and intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.73 [confidence interval = 0.59-0.83], respectively). The parents' coded Numbers ratings correlated moderately with their child's ratings (rho = 0.57; p = .05) and agreed in 20% to 100% of cases (kappa = 0.388). There was better overall agreement between parents' FLACC scores and child ratings (33%-67% agreement; kappa = 0.43). The parent underestimated the child's pain with FLACC ratings in only one case (8%), but overestimated pain in three cases (25%). This study suggests that parents of children with CI provide reasonable estimates of their child's pain, particularly when using a structured pain tool. Parents may, however, tend to overestimate their child's pain during the early postoperative period.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app