IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v24y2015i1-2p212-221.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of two observational pain assessment scales during the anaesthesia recovery period in Chinese surgical older adults

Author

Listed:
  • Li‐Li Guo
  • Li Li
  • Yao‐Wei Liu
  • Keela Herr

Abstract

Aims and objectives To evaluate the reliability and validity of the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia scale and the Checklist of Nonverbal Pain Indicators in Chinese older adults post surgery during the anaesthesia recovery period. Background Pain assessment in older surgical patients is complicated by factors such as anaesthesia and opioid administration. Although observational pain behavioural assessment tools have been validated for those unable to self‐report, research on their application during the anaesthesia recovery period is limited. Design A prospective correlational design. Methods Ninety‐three older patients admitted for scheduled abdominal surgery were recruited in a university‐affiliated hospital. The two observational scales were used to conduct pain assessments during the anaesthesia recovery period. On the first and the third postoperative day, participants recalled their pain intensity during the recovery period using the Numeric Rating Scale or the Faces Pain Scale‐Revised. Results The internal consistency reliability of the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia scale and the Checklist of Nonverbal Pain Indicators was 0·81 and 0·69 respectively. The correlation between scores of the two observational scales was 0·95. The recalled self‐reports of pain intensity were significantly correlated. The correlation of the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia scale and patients’ recalled self‐reports was 0·55, 0·54, and the correlation between the Checklist of Nonverbal Pain Indicators and the two recalled pain scores was both 0·60. Conclusions Both the two observational scales had good reliability and validity when used to assess pain in Chinese surgical older adults during the anaesthesia recovery period. Relevance to clinical practice Observational pain scales can be useful as a tool for patients unable to self‐report. Accurate use of one of the observational pain tools can help identify pain during the anaesthesia recovery period, when patients are unable to self‐report, to support effective pain management during this period.

Suggested Citation

  • Li‐Li Guo & Li Li & Yao‐Wei Liu & Keela Herr, 2015. "Evaluation of two observational pain assessment scales during the anaesthesia recovery period in Chinese surgical older adults," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(1-2), pages 212-221, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:24:y:2015:i:1-2:p:212-221
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.12677
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.12677
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.12677?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pei‐Chao Lin & Li‐Chan Lin & Yea‐Ing L Shyu & Mau‐Sun Hua, 2011. "Predictors of pain in nursing home residents with dementia: a cross‐sectional study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(13‐14), pages 1849-1857, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:24:y:2015:i:1-2:p:212-221. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.