Test-retest reliability of the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire

Article English OPEN
Grafton, Kate ; Foster, Nadine ; Wright, Christine (2005)
  • Publisher: Wolters Kluwer

<p>Objectives: No previous study has adequately demonstrated the test-retest reliability of the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire, yet it is increasingly being used as a measure of pain. This study evaluates the test-retest reliability in patients with osteoarthritis.</p>\ud <p>Methods: A prospective, observational cohort study was undertaken using serial evaluation of 57 patients at 2 time points. A sample of patients awaiting primary hip or knee joint replacement surgery were recruited in clinic or via mail (mean age 64.8 years). Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaires were delivered by mail 5 days apart, and\ud a supplementary questionnaire was completed on the second occasion to explore if the patients’ pain report had remained stable.</p>\ud <p>Results: The intraclass correlation coefficient was used as an estimate of reliability. For the total, sensory, affective, and average pain scores, high intra-class correlations were demonstrated (0.96, 0.95, 0.88, and 0.89, respectively). The current pain component demonstrated\ud a lower intraclass correlation of 0.75. The coefficient of repeatability was calculated as an estimation of the minimum metrically detectable change. The coefficients of repeatability for the total, sensory, affective, average, and current pain components were 5.2, 4.5, 2.8, 1.4 cm, and 1.4, respectively.</p>\ud <p>Discussion: Problems of adequate completion of the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire were highlighted in this sample, and supervision via telephone contact was required. Patients recruited in clinic who had practiced completing the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire demonstrated fewer errors than those recruited by mail. The Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire was demonstrated to be a highly reliable measure of pain. These results should not be generalized\ud to a more elderly population, as increasing age was correlated with greater variability of the sensory component scores.</p>
  • References (8)

    47. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979; 86: 420-8.

    48. Chinn S. Repeatability and method comparison. Thorax. 1991; 46: 454-6.

    49. Bland M, An Introduction to Medical Statistics. Vol. 3rd edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2000.

    50. British Standards Institution. Precision of test methods. Part 1: Guide for determination and reproducibility far a standard test method. . BS5497, part1. British Standards Institution. 1979: 1-22.

    51. Jensen MP, McFarland A. Increasing the reliability and validity of pain intensity measurement in chronic pain patients. Pain. 1993; 55: 195-203.

    52. Papageorgiou AC, Badley EM. The quality of pain in arthritis: the words patients use to describe overall pain and pain in individual joints at rest and on movement. J Rheumatol. 1989; 16: 106-12.

    53. Hayes V, Morris J, Wolfe C, et al. The SF-36 Health Survey Questionnaire: is it suitable for use with older adults? Age Ageing. 1995; 24: 120-5.

    54. Roche PA. Memory for pain: a physiotherapy issue. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice. 1993; 9: 87-90.

  • Metrics
    views in OpenAIRE
    views in local repository
    downloads in local repository

    The information is available from the following content providers:

    From Number Of Views Number Of Downloads
    Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive - IRUS-UK 0 506
Share - Bookmark