Abstract

Validation studies of pain interference instruments used among student pharmacists are rare yet essential for understanding their appropriate use and interpretation in pharmacy education and practice. This study conducted validation and reliability assessments of a five-item Pain Interference Scale previously administered to student pharmacists. Construct validity was assessed using Rasch analysis. Unidimensionality was measured using: point-biserial measure correlations; percent of raw variance explained by items; difference between expected; variance modeled by items; and Rasch model fit. To assess scale functioning, response frequency distribution, observed average and sample expected logit distribution, Andrich logit distribution, item separation, and item reliability were assessed. Visual examination of the Item-Person Map determined content validity. Items explained 64.2% of data raw variance. The difference between raw variance modeled and observed was 0.6. Point-biserial measure correlations were >0.77. Item mean-square infits were 0.7–1.3 while outfit measures were 0.72–1.16. There were >10 responses per response category, response frequency and Andrich thresholds progressively advanced, and observed average and sample expected logits advanced monotonically, Andrich logits = −2.33–1.69, item separation = 2.61, and item reliability = 0.87. Item probability curves indicated response categories were minimally yet adequately distinct. Cronbach’s alpha = 0.93. The Item-Person Map had a ceiling effect indicating content gaps. In conclusion, the pain interference instrument has acceptable construct validity yet contains content gaps. Additional difficult items should be added to the instrument to better capture pain interference among student pharmacists.

Highlights

  • IntroductionPublisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations

  • Measuring pain interference has been recommended for use in clinical practice and clinical trials as a proxy for measuring physical functioning or extent of disability associated with pain [4,5,6,7]

  • A significant content gap was observed for less difficult items: items which respondents find easy to say that pain interferes with an area of life

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. The Department of Health and Human Services and the Institute of Medicine have made recent statements acknowledging chronic pain and its impact on health outcomes [1,2]. States (US) were living with chronic pain and 7% were living with chronic pain that had significant pain interference [3]. Pain interference can be defined as the perceived extent to which pain obstructs an individual’s engagement in daily activities including recreational, emotional, physical, or cognitive activities [4]. Measuring pain interference has been recommended for use in clinical practice and clinical trials as a proxy for measuring physical functioning or extent of disability associated with pain [4,5,6,7]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call