Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften Toetsvragen Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
Inloggen

Welkom bij THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie heeft ervoor gezorgd dat je Mijn BSL eenvoudig en snel kunt raadplegen. Je kunt je links eenvoudig registreren. Met deze gegevens kun je thuis, of waar ook ter wereld toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL. Heb je een vraag, neem dan contact op met helpdesk@thim.nl.

» Andere revante producten voor THIM studenten en medewerkers.

Registreer

Om ook buiten de locaties van THIM, thuis bijvoorbeeld, van Mijn BSL gebruik te kunnen maken, moet je jezelf eenmalig registreren. Dit kan alleen vanaf een computer op een van de locaties van THIM.

Eenmaal geregistreerd kun je thuis of waar ook ter wereld onbeperkt toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Login

Als u al geregistreerd bent, hoeft u alleen maar in te loggen om onbeperkt toegang te krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in:

01-02-2014

Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the PROMIS pain quality item bank

Auteurs: Dennis A. Revicki, Karon F. Cook, Dagmar Amtmann, Neesha Harnam, Wen-Hung Chen, Francis J. Keefe

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 1/2014

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

The assessment of pain sensation and quality is a key component in understanding the experience of individuals with chronic pain. This study evaluated the factor structure of the patient-reported outcome measurement information system (PROMIS) pain quality item bank.

Methods

As part of the PROMIS project, we developed a pool of 37 pain quality items, based on a review of existing pain questionnaires and development of new items. A web-based survey was designed and completed by 845 members of the general population and 967 individuals with different types of chronic pain. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted on a random split-half sample of the data to examine the factor structure of the 37 PROMIS pain quality items in the general population and in a chronic pain sample. A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted in the holdout sample.

Results

The EFA of the pain quality items resulted in comparable six-factor solutions for the general and chronic pain samples: (1) pulling/tugging pain; (2) tingling/numbness pain; (3) sharp/stabbing pain; (4) dull/aching pain; (5) pounding/pulsing pain; and (6) affective pain. The confirmatory factor analysis in the holdout sample supported this factor structure.

Conclusions

Further research is needed to evaluate the psychometric characteristics of the derived scales based on their factor scores.
vorige artikel Testing measurement invariance of the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system pain behaviors score between the US general population sample and a sample of individuals with chronic pain
volgende artikel Cognitive interviewing of the US National Cancer Institute’s Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE)
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
1.
Dworkin, R. H., Turk, D. C., Farrar, J. T., Haythornthwaite, J. A., Jensen, M. P., Katz, N. P., et al. (2005). Core outcome measures for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain, 113(1–2), 9–19.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Price, D. D., Harkins, S. W., & Baker, C. (1987). Sensory-affective relationships among different types of clinical and experimental pain. Pain, 28(3), 297–307.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Jensen, M. P. (2003). The validity and reliability of pain measures for use in clinical trials in adults. In Presented at the second meeting of the initiative on methods, measurement, and pain assessment in clinical trials (IMMPACT-II).
4.
Price, D. D. (1999). Psychological mechanisms of pain and analgesia. Seattle: IASP Press.
5.
Melzack, R. (1975). The McGill Pain Questionnaire: Major properties and scoring methods. Pain, 1(3), 277–299.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Melzack, R., & Katz, J. (2001). The McGill Pain Questionnaire: Appraisal and current status. In D. C. Turk & R. Melzack (Eds.), Handbook of pain assessment (2nd ed., pp. 659–692). New York: Guilford Press.
7.
8.
9.
Dworkin, R. H., Turk, D. C., Revicki, D. A., Harding, G., Coyne, K. S., Peirce-Sandner, S., et al. (2009). Development and initial validation of an expanded and revised version of the Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ-2). Pain, 144(1–2), 35–42.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Clark, W. C., Kuhl, J. P., Keohan, M. L., Knotkova, H., Winer, R. T., & Griswold, G. A. (2003). Factor analysis validates the cluster structure of the dendrogram underlying the multidimensional affect and pain survey (MAPS) and challenges the a priori classification of the descriptors in the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ). Pain, 106(3), 357–363.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Jensen, M. P., Gammaitoni, A. R., Olaleye, D. O., Oleka, N., Nalamachu, S. R., & Galer, B. S. (2006). The pain quality assessment scale: Assessment of pain quality in carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of Pain, 7(11), 823–832.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Byrne, M., Troy, A., Bradley, L. A., Marchisello, P. J., Geisinger, K. F., Van der Heide, L. H., et al. (1982). Cross-validation of the factor structure of the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Pain, 13(2), 193–201.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Crockett, D. J., Prkachin, K. M., Craig, K. D., & Greenstein, H. (1986). Social influences on factored dimensions of the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 30(4), 461–469.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Hasegawa, M., Hattori, S., Mishima, M., Matsumoto, I., Kimura, T., Baba, Y., et al. (2001). The McGill Pain Questionnaire, Japanese version, reconsidered: Confirming the theoretical structure. Pain Research and Management, 6(4), 173–180.PubMed
15.
Lowe, N. K., Walker, S. N., & MacCallum, R. C. (1991). Confirming the theoretical structure of the McGill Pain Questionnaire in acute clinical pain. Pain, 46(1), 53–60.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Masedo, A. I., & Esteve, R. (2000). Some empirical evidence regarding the validity of the Spanish version of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ-SV). Pain, 85(3), 451–456.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Mystakidou, K., Parpa, E., Tsilika, E., Kalaidopoulou, O., Georgaki, S., Galanos, A., et al. (2002). Greek McGill Pain Questionnaire: Validation and utility in cancer patients. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 24(4), 379–387.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Reading, A. E. (1982). A comparison of the McGill Pain Questionnaire in chronic and acute pain. Pain, 13(2), 185–192.PubMedCrossRef
19.
20.
Griswold, G. A., & Clark, W. C. (2005). Item analysis of cancer patient responses to the multidimensional affect and pain survey demonstrates high inter-item consistency and discriminability and determines the content of a short form. Journal of Pain, 6(2), 67–74.PubMedCrossRef
21.
22.
Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Cook, K. F., Crane, P. K., Teresi, J. A., et al. (2007). Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: Plans for the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S22–S31. doi:10.​1097/​01.​mlr.​0000250483.​85507.​04.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Liu, H., Cella, D., Gershon, R., Shen, J., Morales, L. S., Riley, W., et al. (2010). Representativeness of the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system internet panel. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(11), 1169–1178. doi:10.​1016/​j.​jclinepi.​2009.​11.​021.
24.
25.
Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis. Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. (2004). Mplus user’s guide (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
27.
Victor, T. W., Jensen, M. P., Gammaitoni, A. R., Gould, E. M., White, R. E., & Galer, B. S. (2008). The dimensions of pain quality: Factor analysis of the Pain Quality Assessment Scale. Clinical Journal of Pain, 24(6), 550–555. doi:10.​1097/​AJP.​0b013e31816b1058​.PubMedCrossRef
28.
29.
30.
Dworkin, R. H., Corbin, A. E., Young, J. P, Jr., Sharma, U., LaMoreaux, L., Bockbrader, H., et al. (2003). Pregabalin for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Neurology, 60(8), 1274–1283.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Rowbotham, M., Harden, N., Stacey, B., Bernstein, P., & Magnus-Miller, L. (1998). Gabapentin for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280(21), 1837–1842.PubMedCrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the PROMIS pain quality item bank
Auteurs
Dennis A. Revicki
Karon F. Cook
Dagmar Amtmann
Neesha Harnam
Wen-Hung Chen
Francis J. Keefe
Publicatiedatum
01-02-2014
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 1/2014
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0467-9

Andere artikelen Uitgave 1/2014

A conceptual model of health-related quality of life in sarcoidosis

Erratum to: Understanding appraisal processes underlying the thentest: a mixed methods investigation

  • Erratum

Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Italian version of the Foot Function Index in patients with foot and ankle diseases

  • Brief Communication

Predictors of psychological well-being and stress among Jordanian menopausal women

Poor self-rated health associated with an increased risk of subsequent development of lung cancer

Evaluation of the similarities and differences in response patterns to the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory and the Child Oral Health Impact Scores among youth with cleft