Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Assessing pain in critically ill brain-injured patients: a psychometric comparison of three pain scales and videopupillometry.

Pain 2019 June 11
Three clinical scales (the Nociception-Coma-Scale adapted for Intubated-patients (NCS-I), its Revised version (NCS-R-I), and the Behavioral-Pain-Scale (BPS)) and videopupillometry were compared for measuring pain in intubated, non-communicating, critically ill, brain-injured (CIBI) patients. Pain assessment was performed before, during, just after and 5-min after three procedures: the reference non-nociceptive procedure (assessment of the Richmond-Agitation-Sedation-Scale), and two nociceptive procedures (turning and tracheal-suctioning). The primary-endpoint was construct validity (discriminant and criterion validation), determined by comparing pain measurements between different times/procedures. Secondary-endpoints were internal consistency, interrater reliability and feasibility. Fifty patients (54% women, median age 63-yr [56-68]) were included 13 [7-24] days after brain-injury (76% hemorrhagic or ischemic strokes). All tools increased significantly more (p<0.001) during the nociceptive procedures versus the non-nociceptive procedure. The BPS was the only pain tool that did not increase significantly during the non-nociceptive procedure (p=0.41), suggesting that it was the most discriminant tool. BPS, NCS-I and NCS-R-I were good predictors of nociception with areas-under-thecurves (AUC) ≥0.96, contrary to videopupillometry (AUC=0.67). The BPS, NCS-I and NCS-I-R had high interrater reliabilities (weighted-kappa=0.86, 0.82 and 0.84, respectively). Internal consistency was moderate (>0.60) for all pain-scales. Factor-analysis represented a majority of information on a first dimension, with motor domains represented on a second dimension. Scale feasibility was better for NCS-I and NCS-R-I than for BPS. In conclusion, BPS, NCS-I and NCS-R-I are valid, reliable and acceptable pain-scales for use in intubated CIBI patients, unlike videopupillometry. Future research requires tool design centered on domains of observation adapted to this very specific population.

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.

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