Evaluation of the validity and response burden of patient self-report measures of the pain assessment screening tool and outcomes registry (Pastor)

Karon F. Cook, Michael A. Kallen, Chester Buckenmaier, Diane M. Flynn, Steven R. Hanling, Teresa S. Collins, Kristin Joltes, Kyung Kwon, Sheila Medina-Torne, Parisa Nahavandi, Joshua Suen, Richard Gershon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: In 2009, the Army Pain Management Task Force was chartered. On the basis of their findings, the Department of Defense recommended a comprehensive pain management strategy that included development of a standardized pain assessment system that would collect patient-reported outcomes data to inform the patient-provider clinical encounter. The result was the Pain Assessment Screening Tool and Outcomes Registry (PASTOR). The purpose of this study was to assess the validity and response burden of the patient-reported outcome measures in PASTOR. Methods: Data for analyses were collected from 681 individuals who completed PASTOR at baseline and follow-up as part of their routine clinical care. The survey tool included self-report measures of pain severity and pain interference (measured using the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System [PROMIS] and the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating scale). PROMIS measures of pain correlates also were administered. Validation analyses included estimation of score associations among measures, comparison of scores of known groups, responsiveness, ceiling and floor effects, and response burden. Results: Results of psychometric testing provided substantial evidence for the validity of PASTOR self-report measures in this population. Expected associations among scores largely supported the concurrent validity of the measures. Scores effectively distinguished among respondents on the basis of their self-reported impressions of general health. PROMIS measures were administered using computer adaptive testing and each, on average, required less than 1 minute to administer. Statistical and graphical analyses demonstrated the responsiveness of PASTOR measures over time.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)e1851-e1861
JournalMilitary Medicine
Volume182
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2017

Fingerprint

Pain Measurement
Self Report
Registries
Information Systems
Pain
Pain Management
National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
Veterans
Advisory Committees
Psychometrics
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Health
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Cook, K. F., Kallen, M. A., Buckenmaier, C., Flynn, D. M., Hanling, S. R., Collins, T. S., ... Gershon, R. (2017). Evaluation of the validity and response burden of patient self-report measures of the pain assessment screening tool and outcomes registry (Pastor). Military Medicine, 182(7), e1851-e1861. https://doi.org/10.7205/MILMED-D-16-00285

Evaluation of the validity and response burden of patient self-report measures of the pain assessment screening tool and outcomes registry (Pastor). / Cook, Karon F.; Kallen, Michael A.; Buckenmaier, Chester; Flynn, Diane M.; Hanling, Steven R.; Collins, Teresa S.; Joltes, Kristin; Kwon, Kyung; Medina-Torne, Sheila; Nahavandi, Parisa; Suen, Joshua; Gershon, Richard.

In: Military Medicine, Vol. 182, No. 7, 01.07.2017, p. e1851-e1861.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cook, KF, Kallen, MA, Buckenmaier, C, Flynn, DM, Hanling, SR, Collins, TS, Joltes, K, Kwon, K, Medina-Torne, S, Nahavandi, P, Suen, J & Gershon, R 2017, 'Evaluation of the validity and response burden of patient self-report measures of the pain assessment screening tool and outcomes registry (Pastor)', Military Medicine, vol. 182, no. 7, pp. e1851-e1861. https://doi.org/10.7205/MILMED-D-16-00285
Cook, Karon F. ; Kallen, Michael A. ; Buckenmaier, Chester ; Flynn, Diane M. ; Hanling, Steven R. ; Collins, Teresa S. ; Joltes, Kristin ; Kwon, Kyung ; Medina-Torne, Sheila ; Nahavandi, Parisa ; Suen, Joshua ; Gershon, Richard. / Evaluation of the validity and response burden of patient self-report measures of the pain assessment screening tool and outcomes registry (Pastor). In: Military Medicine. 2017 ; Vol. 182, No. 7. pp. e1851-e1861.
@article{881c58a1576b4841996f724ffad6bd81,
title = "Evaluation of the validity and response burden of patient self-report measures of the pain assessment screening tool and outcomes registry (Pastor)",
abstract = "Background: In 2009, the Army Pain Management Task Force was chartered. On the basis of their findings, the Department of Defense recommended a comprehensive pain management strategy that included development of a standardized pain assessment system that would collect patient-reported outcomes data to inform the patient-provider clinical encounter. The result was the Pain Assessment Screening Tool and Outcomes Registry (PASTOR). The purpose of this study was to assess the validity and response burden of the patient-reported outcome measures in PASTOR. Methods: Data for analyses were collected from 681 individuals who completed PASTOR at baseline and follow-up as part of their routine clinical care. The survey tool included self-report measures of pain severity and pain interference (measured using the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System [PROMIS] and the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating scale). PROMIS measures of pain correlates also were administered. Validation analyses included estimation of score associations among measures, comparison of scores of known groups, responsiveness, ceiling and floor effects, and response burden. Results: Results of psychometric testing provided substantial evidence for the validity of PASTOR self-report measures in this population. Expected associations among scores largely supported the concurrent validity of the measures. Scores effectively distinguished among respondents on the basis of their self-reported impressions of general health. PROMIS measures were administered using computer adaptive testing and each, on average, required less than 1 minute to administer. Statistical and graphical analyses demonstrated the responsiveness of PASTOR measures over time.",
author = "Cook, {Karon F.} and Kallen, {Michael A.} and Chester Buckenmaier and Flynn, {Diane M.} and Hanling, {Steven R.} and Collins, {Teresa S.} and Kristin Joltes and Kyung Kwon and Sheila Medina-Torne and Parisa Nahavandi and Joshua Suen and Richard Gershon",
year = "2017",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.7205/MILMED-D-16-00285",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "182",
pages = "e1851--e1861",
journal = "Military Medicine",
issn = "0026-4075",
publisher = "Association of Military Surgeons of the US",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of the validity and response burden of patient self-report measures of the pain assessment screening tool and outcomes registry (Pastor)

AU - Cook, Karon F.

AU - Kallen, Michael A.

AU - Buckenmaier, Chester

AU - Flynn, Diane M.

AU - Hanling, Steven R.

AU - Collins, Teresa S.

AU - Joltes, Kristin

AU - Kwon, Kyung

AU - Medina-Torne, Sheila

AU - Nahavandi, Parisa

AU - Suen, Joshua

AU - Gershon, Richard

PY - 2017/7/1

Y1 - 2017/7/1

N2 - Background: In 2009, the Army Pain Management Task Force was chartered. On the basis of their findings, the Department of Defense recommended a comprehensive pain management strategy that included development of a standardized pain assessment system that would collect patient-reported outcomes data to inform the patient-provider clinical encounter. The result was the Pain Assessment Screening Tool and Outcomes Registry (PASTOR). The purpose of this study was to assess the validity and response burden of the patient-reported outcome measures in PASTOR. Methods: Data for analyses were collected from 681 individuals who completed PASTOR at baseline and follow-up as part of their routine clinical care. The survey tool included self-report measures of pain severity and pain interference (measured using the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System [PROMIS] and the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating scale). PROMIS measures of pain correlates also were administered. Validation analyses included estimation of score associations among measures, comparison of scores of known groups, responsiveness, ceiling and floor effects, and response burden. Results: Results of psychometric testing provided substantial evidence for the validity of PASTOR self-report measures in this population. Expected associations among scores largely supported the concurrent validity of the measures. Scores effectively distinguished among respondents on the basis of their self-reported impressions of general health. PROMIS measures were administered using computer adaptive testing and each, on average, required less than 1 minute to administer. Statistical and graphical analyses demonstrated the responsiveness of PASTOR measures over time.

AB - Background: In 2009, the Army Pain Management Task Force was chartered. On the basis of their findings, the Department of Defense recommended a comprehensive pain management strategy that included development of a standardized pain assessment system that would collect patient-reported outcomes data to inform the patient-provider clinical encounter. The result was the Pain Assessment Screening Tool and Outcomes Registry (PASTOR). The purpose of this study was to assess the validity and response burden of the patient-reported outcome measures in PASTOR. Methods: Data for analyses were collected from 681 individuals who completed PASTOR at baseline and follow-up as part of their routine clinical care. The survey tool included self-report measures of pain severity and pain interference (measured using the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System [PROMIS] and the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating scale). PROMIS measures of pain correlates also were administered. Validation analyses included estimation of score associations among measures, comparison of scores of known groups, responsiveness, ceiling and floor effects, and response burden. Results: Results of psychometric testing provided substantial evidence for the validity of PASTOR self-report measures in this population. Expected associations among scores largely supported the concurrent validity of the measures. Scores effectively distinguished among respondents on the basis of their self-reported impressions of general health. PROMIS measures were administered using computer adaptive testing and each, on average, required less than 1 minute to administer. Statistical and graphical analyses demonstrated the responsiveness of PASTOR measures over time.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85026544566&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85026544566&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.7205/MILMED-D-16-00285

DO - 10.7205/MILMED-D-16-00285

M3 - Article

VL - 182

SP - e1851-e1861

JO - Military Medicine

JF - Military Medicine

SN - 0026-4075

IS - 7

ER -