Use of the Pain Assessment Checklist for Seniors with Limited Ability to Communicate-II (Pacslac-II) by People Who Are Not Health Professionals
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Pain is prevalent among older adults but it is often underestimated and undertreated, especially in older people with dementia. Patients with severe dementia are likely to suffer from untreated pain because of their limited ability to report it. Observational methods of pain assessment, such as the Pain Assessment Checklist for Seniors with Limited Ability to Communicate-II (PACSLAC-II; Chan, Hadjistavropoulos, Williams, & Lints-Martindale, 2014), have been shown to be valid indicators of pain in this population when completed by health professionals or other trained personnel (Fuchs-Lacelle, Hadjistavropoulos, & Lix, 2008; Zwakhalen, Hamers, Abu-Saad, & Berger, 2006). With growing demands, informal caregivers who are laypersons are an untapped assessor group, although they often have the primary responsibility for seniors with dementia. The goal of this investigation was to compare the behavioural pain assessment ability of persons who are not health professionals to that of experienced nursing staff. Videos depicting dementia patients expressing pain were presented to professional and non-professional participants. Both groups (i.e., laypersons and long-term care staff) were shown the video segments in random order and then completed the PACSLAC-II, the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia Scale (PAINAD; Warden, Hurley, & Volicer, 2003) as an index of concurrent validity, and a Global Rating Scale for each video segment. The responses of the two groups were compared. As expected, both laypeople and nurses were able to effectively differentiate painful from non-painful situations. Both groups were also able to discriminate between gradations of pain (i.e., baseline, mild, moderate, severe). Moreover, tool internal consistency was compared as a function of professional and non-professional status. Results confirmed the validity and reliability among non-professional adults when using the PACSLAC-II and the PAINAD to assess pain. Exploratory analyses did not identify a systematic relationship between demographic characteristics of participants and pain ratings provided. It was concluded that, as hypothesized, both instruments can be used for the assessment of pain in patients with dementia by laypeople. This study is the first to validate these instruments for use by laypeople. These findings will help to promote the assessment of pain in community settings, thus facilitating pain treatment and earlier detection of symptoms in older adults with dementia. Keywords: Pain; Dementia; Older Adults; Observational Pain Assessment
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».