The psychometric assessment of the older adult in pain: A systematic review of assessment instruments.

Autor: McLennan AIG; Department of Psychology and Centre on Aging and Health, University of Regina, 3737 Wascana Parkway, Regina, SK, Canada, S4S 0A2., Winters EM; Department of Psychology and Centre on Aging and Health, University of Regina, 3737 Wascana Parkway, Regina, SK, Canada, S4S 0A2., Gagnon MM; Department of Psychology and Health Studies, University of Saskatchewan, 9 Campus Drive, 154 Arts, Saskatoon, SK, Canada S7N 5A5., Hadjistavropoulos T; Department of Psychology and Centre on Aging and Health, University of Regina, 3737 Wascana Parkway, Regina, SK, Canada, S4S 0A2. Electronic address: Thomas.Hadjistavropoulos@uregina.ca.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Clinical psychology review [Clin Psychol Rev] 2024 Dec; Vol. 114, pp. 102513. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Oct 29.
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102513
Abstrakt: We conducted a systematic review of pain assessment tools suitable for community-dwelling older adults. For this work, we conceptualized existing psychometric tools as falling under the following domains: a) pain intensity/characteristics; b) pain-related interference/disability; c) coping strategies; d) pain beliefs/attitudes/cognitions; e) pain-related fear and anxiety; and f) pain-specific emotional distress. Multi-dimensional and condition-specific tools were also considered. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures guided the evaluation of measurement properties, quality of evidence ratings, and recommendations for each measure. A search of Medline, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, yielded a total of 21,755 records. Of these, 120 studies, focusing on 57 psychometric tools, were included in this review and categorized into the aforementioned pain assessment domains. The availability of psychometric studies with older adult populations was insufficient for most tools and the quality of evidence ranged from very low to high. Only a small number of tools met the criteria for a strong or tentative recommendation favoring their use. We identified gaps that should be addressed in future research.
Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: