Validation of general pain scores from multidomain assessment tools in stroke

Ali, M. , Tibble, H., Brady, M. C., Quinn, T. J. , Sunnerhagen, K. S., Venketasubramanian, N., Shuaib, A., Pandyan, A., Mead, G. and on behalf of the VISTA collaboration, (2024) Validation of general pain scores from multidomain assessment tools in stroke. Frontiers in Neurology, 15, 1328832. (doi: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1328832)

Abstract

Purpose: We describe how well general pain reported in multidomain assessment tools correlated with pain-specific assessment tools; associations between general pain, activities of daily living and independence after stroke.Stroke Trials Archive (VISTA) described correlation coefficients examining (i) direct comparisons of assessments from pain-specific and multidomain assessment tools that included pain, (ii) indirect comparisons of pain assessments with the Barthel Index (BI) and modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and (iii) whether pain identification could be enhanced by accounting for reported usual activities, self-care, mobility and anxiety/depression; factors associated with pain.Results: European Quality of Life 3-and 5-Level (EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L), RAND 36 Item Health Survey 1.0 (SF-36) or the 0-10 Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) were available from 10/94 studies (IPD=10,002). The 0-10 NPRS was the only available pain-specific assessment tool and was a reference for comparison with other tools. Pearson correlation coefficients between the 0-10 NPRS and (A) the EQ-5D-3L and (B) EQ5D-5L were r=0.572 (n=436) and r=0.305 (n=1134), respectively. mRS was better aligned with pain by EQ-5D-3L (n=8966; r=0.340) than by SF-36 (n=623; r=0.318). BI aligned better with pain by SF-36 (n=623; r=-0.320). Creating a composite score using the EQ-5D 3L and 5L comprising pain, mobility, usual-activities, self-care and anxiety/depression did not improve correlation with the 0-10 NPRS.The EQ-5D-3L pain domain aligned better than the EQ-5D-5L with the 0-10 NPRS and may inform general pain description where resources and assessment burden hinder use of additional, pain-specific assessments.

• Item Type: Articles
• Additional Information: The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This study was supported by the NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde Endowment Fund and originated from a writing group grant from BIASP/NIHR.
• Status: Published
• Refereed: Yes
• Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID: Mead, Dr Gillian and Quinn, Professor Terry and Ali, Dr Myzoon

Creator Roles

Ali, M.: Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Project administration, Software, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing
Quinn, T.: Conceptualization, Data curation, Methodology, Writing – review and editing
Mead, G.: Conceptualization, Data curation, Funding acquisition, Writing – review and editing

• Authors: Ali, M., Tibble, H., Brady, M. C., Quinn, T. J., Sunnerhagen, K. S., Venketasubramanian, N., Shuaib, A., Pandyan, A., Mead, G., and on behalf of the VISTA collaboration,
• College/School: College of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences > School of Cardiovascular & Metabolic Health
• Journal Name: Frontiers in Neurology
• Publisher: Frontiers Media
• ISSN: 1664-2295
• ISSN (Online): 1664-2295
• Copyright Holders: Copyright: © 2024 Ali, Tibble, Brady, Quinn, Sunnerhagen, Venketasubramanian, Shuaib, Pandyan and Mead
• First Published: First published in Frontiers in Neurology 15: 1328832
• Publisher Policy: Reproduced under a Creative Commons licence