Open AccessReliability and Validity of the Global Pain Scale with Chronic Pain Sufferers
Author(s) -
Douglas A. Gentile,
Jonathan Woodhouse,
Paul Lynch,
Julia Maier,
Tory McJunkin
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
pain physician
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.31
H-Index - 99
eISSN - 2150-1149
pISSN - 1533-3159
DOI - 10.36076/ppj.2011/14/61
Subject(s) - generalizability theory , construct validity , mcgill pain questionnaire , medicine , physical therapy , population , scale (ratio) , pain scale , clinical psychology , discriminant validity , convergent validity , chronic pain , pain assessment , reliability (semiconductor) , validity , psychometrics , psychology , visual analogue scale , developmental psychology , pain management , cartography , power (physics) , physics , environmental health , internal consistency , quantum mechanics , geography
Background: Many pain scales exist today; however, a comprehensive, easy-to-analyzetest has yet to be available to evaluate a patient’s pain and understand the sociocultural,cognitive, and affective factors contributing to a patient’s overall pain experience.Many scales have attempted to create an all-encompassing pain assessment but remainincomplete in their assessment of pain and the contributing aspects of pain.Objective: To present the Global Pain Scale (GPS) as an alternative to current painassessments and evaluate the reliability and construct validity of the GPS.Methods: Two hundred sixty-two undergraduates with chronic pain at a largemidwestern university participated in this survey study. Participants reported in whichof 14 specific body regions they have pain, the frequency of pain, and treatment historyfor their pain. Participants completed 4 scales— GPS, the West Haven Yale Scale (WHY),the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), and the short form McGill (SF-MPQ) — in a randomizedorder.Results: The GPS demonstrated high criterion validity and high construct validity(including both convergent and discriminant validity). The total GPS scale and each ofthe subscales were reliable. The total GPS score was significantly correlated with all othersubscales, excluding those for which there is a theoretical reason for them to not becorrelated with our participant population.Limitations: A sample of college students was used, thus decreasing the generalizabilityof these findings to patients approximating our sample.Conclusions: The GPS is a valid scale that is concise and easily interpreted. The GPS isa comprehensive assessment of pain evaluating pain, emotions, clinical outcomes, anddaily activities. This may be a valuable tool for evaluation and treatment planning forinterventional pain management physicians.Key words: chronic pain, pain assessment comprehensive pain scale, pain scales