• Pain Manag Nurs · Dec 2013

    Validity and reliability of the critical care pain observation tool: a replication study.

    • Kathleen Marie Keane.
    • Maine Medical Center, Portland, Maine, and Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts. Electronic address: keanek@mmc.org.
    • Pain Manag Nurs. 2013 Dec 1;14(4):e216-25.

    AbstractCritically ill patients are often not able to self-report the presence of pain. Currently there is no generally accepted assessment tool for this population. The Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) was developed for pain assessment of critically ill patients. The purpose of this study was to replicate the findings of the Gelinas et al. (2006) CPOT reference study and examine the interrater reliability (IRR), discriminant validity (DV), and criterion validity (CV) of the CPOT. This quantitative study used a repeated measures design with a convenience sample of 21 postoperative open heart surgery patients cared for in a tertiary-care teaching hospital. Testing for IRR in this sample showed a range of results resulting in fair to almost perfect IRR; the findings of this study suggest that the instrument's IRR is acceptable but variable. Testing for DV demonstrated a significant difference in mean scores between noxious (painful) and nonnoxious (nonpainful) procedures. Testing for CV showed a weak nonsignificant Spearman correlation of 0.26 (P < .312) between CPOT scores and patient self-report during repositioning after extubation. This replication study adds to four studies that have examined psychometric attributes of the instrument and contributes to the process of translating the use of this instrument to the clinical setting.Copyright © 2013 American Society for Pain Management Nursing. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,624,503 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.