Title: Compare validation of Chinese-version CPOT & BPS in critically ill patients
Li-Hua Cheng, RN, MS, Yun-Fang Tsai, RN, PhD, Cheng-Hsu Wang, M.D, Pei-Kwei Tsay, PhD
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan
Abstract: To compare the effectiveness of the Chinese versions of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) and the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) in measuring the pain of critically ill patients. A cross-over observational design was used in the intensive care units of a regional teaching hospital in northern Taiwan. A total of 316 patients (213 conscious and 103 unconscious) were enrolled. Collated data examined the relationship between self-report/physiologic indicators and compared criterion validity and the discriminant validity of the CPOT and BPS scales. The pain reactions of conscious and unconscious critically ill intubation patients were observed during 2 procedures: 1) nociceptive procedure: suction; and 2) non-nociceptive procedure: taking noninvasive blood pressure. Having controlled the differences in properties of the two groups of patients, only the CPOT scores (OR = 1.93, p<0.01) and BPS scores (OR = 1.83, p<0.01) could predict patients’ self-report of the presence of pain through two separate logistic analyses. Moreover, the area under curve (AUC) of the Chinese version CPOT was 76.4%, and the AUC of the Chinese version BPS was 73.1%. The effectiveness of the Chinese version CPOT for measuring critically ill patients’ pain is better than the Chinese version of BPS. It is recommended that the Chinese version of the CPOT be used in the future to assess the pain of critically ill patients.
Audience Take Away:
- Audience may learn how to examine criterion validity and the discriminant validity of scales in clinical assessment.
- This result of research supported use of Chinese-version CPOT better than BPS scales in pain assessment at ICU which is reliable and valid.
- Applying an effective pain assessment tool to non-verbal patients in order to get more effective treatment.