首页> 外文期刊>Pain management nursing: official journal of the American Society of Pain Management Nurses >Can We Quickly and Thoroughly Assess Pain with the PACSLAC-II? A Convergent Validity Study in Long-Term Care Residents Suffering from Dementia
【24h】

Can We Quickly and Thoroughly Assess Pain with the PACSLAC-II? A Convergent Validity Study in Long-Term Care Residents Suffering from Dementia

机译:我们可以快速彻底地评估帕斯拉斯拉克-II的痛苦吗? 患有痴呆症的长期护理居民的收敛有效性研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

?017 American Society for Pain Management Nursing ?017 American Society for Pain Management Nursing A previous study found that the modified version of the Pain Assessment Checklist for Seniors with Limited Ability to Communicate (PACSLAC-II) is a valid tool to assess pain in elderly individuals suffering from dementia and who are unable to communicate verbally. The primary objective of this study was to confirm the convergent validity of the PACSLAC-II using direct evaluation of long-term care residents in real-life situations, using two other well-validated pain assessment scales (i.e., PACSLAC and Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia [PAINAD]). A secondary objective was to document and compare the time required to complete and score each assessment scale. During two potentially painful procedures (i.e., transfer/mobilization), 46 long-term care residents (mean age = 83 ?0 years) suffering from dementia were observed by three independent evaluators, each using one of the assessment scales (randomly assigned). Correlational analyses and analysis of variance were used to evaluate the association between each scale and to compare scoring time. The PACSLAC (r = 0.61) and the PAINAD (r = 0.65) were both moderately associated with the PACSLAC-II (all p values .001). The PAINAD's average scoring time (63 ?9 seconds) was lower than the PACSLAC-II's (96 ? seconds), which was lower than the PACSLAC's (135 ?3 seconds) (all p values .001). These results suggest that the PACSLAC-II is a valid tool for assessing pain in individuals with dementia. The time required to complete and score the PACSLAC-II was reasonable, supporting its usefulness in clinical settings. A previous study found that the modified version of the Pain Assessment Checklist for Seniors with Limited Ability to Communicate (PACSLAC-II) is a valid tool to assess pain in elderly individuals suffering from dementia and who are unable to communicate verbally. The primary objective of this study was to confirm the convergent validity of the PACSLAC-II using direct evaluation of long-term care residents in real-life situations, using two other well-validated pain assessment scales (i.e., PACSLAC and Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia [PAINAD]). A secondary objective was to document and compare the time required to complete and score each assessment scale. During two potentially painful procedures (i.e., transfer/mobilization), 46 long-term care residents (mean age = 83 ?0 years) suffering from dementia were observed by three independent evaluators, each using one of the assessment scales (randomly assigned). Correlational analyses and analysis of variance were used to evaluate the association between each scale and to compare scoring time. The PACSLAC (r = 0.61) and the PAINAD (r = 0.65) were both moderately associated with the PACSLAC-II (all p values <.001). The PAINAD's average scoring time (63 ?9 seconds) was lower than the PACSLAC-II's (96 ? seconds), which was lower than the PACSLAC's (135 ?3 seconds) (all p values <.001). These results suggest that the PACSLAC-II is a valid tool for assessing pain in individuals with dementia. The time required to complete and score the PACSLAC-II was reasonable, supporting its usefulness in clinical settings.
机译:?017美国痛苦管理协会护理?017美国痛苦管理学会护理前一项研究发现,沟通能力有限(Pacslac-II)的老年人的止痛评估清单的修改版本是评估老年疼痛的有效工具患有痴呆症和无法口头沟通的人。本研究的主要目的是使用两种其他良好验证的疼痛评估尺度(即先进的Pacslac和疼痛评估痴呆症[PAILAD])。次要目标是记录并比较每个评估规模完成和得分所需的时间。在两个潜在的痛苦手术期间(即转移/动员),通过三个独立评估员观察到患有痴呆症的46个长期护理居民(平均年龄= 83〜0年),每个评估人员使用评估尺度之一(随机分配)。相关分析和差异分析用于评估每个规模之间的关联并比较得分时间。 PACSLAC(r = 0.61)和止痛(r = 0.65)与PACSLAC-II(所有P值& 0.001)相当相关。潘纳的平均得分时间(63?9秒)低于Pacslac-II(96?秒),其低于Pacslac(135?3秒)(所有P值<001)。这些结果表明,PACSLAC-II是评估痴呆症疼痛的有效工具。完成和得分所需的时间是合理的,支持其在临床环境中的有用性。先前的研究发现,沟通能力有限(PACSLAC-II)的老年人的疼痛评估清单的修改版本是评估患有痴呆症的老年人疼痛的有效工具,并且无法口头沟通。本研究的主要目的是使用两种其他良好验证的疼痛评估尺度(即先进的Pacslac和疼痛评估痴呆症[PAILAD])。次要目标是记录并比较每个评估规模完成和得分所需的时间。在两个潜在的痛苦手术期间(即转移/动员),通过三个独立评估员观察到患有痴呆症的46个长期护理居民(平均年龄= 83〜0年),每个评估人员使用评估尺度之一(随机分配)。相关分析和差异分析用于评估每个规模之间的关联并比较得分时间。 PACSLAC(R = 0.61)和止痛(r = 0.65)与PACSLAC-II(所有P值<.001)中等相关。帕萨德的平均得分时间(63?9秒)低于Pacslac-II(96?秒),其低于Pacslac(135?3秒)(所有P值<.001)。这些结果表明,PACSLAC-II是评估痴呆症疼痛的有效工具。完成和得分所需的时间是合理的,支持其在临床环境中的有用性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号