CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 100Pain Management and Opioid UseAnesthesia and Pain ManagementPediatric Pain Management Techniques

Validation of the Brief Pain Inventory in Patients Six Months After Cardiac Surgery

Open access
Gjeilo, Kari Hanne, Stenseth, Roar, Wahba, Alexander, Lydersen, Stian, Klepstad, Pål·2007·Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
DOI 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2007.01.010
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) is a questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and the impact of pain on daily function. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the BPI for use in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Between September 2004 and September 2005, 534 patients completed the BPI before surgery and 462 responded six months after surgery. The BPI was validated with respect to construct validity, internal consistency, criterion validity, and responsiveness. To evaluate the criterion validity, the BPI was validated against the bodily pain (BP) scale of the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). The factor analysis resulted in two distinct factors, supporting the validity of the two-factor structure of the original BPI, with high loadings on pain severity and pain interference. Results indicated acceptable internal consistency, with Cronbach's alpha coefficients between 0.84 and 0.94. The association between the BPI and the SF-36 BP dimension supported the criterion validity, with correlation coefficients between 0.47 and 0.65. The pain severity scale and the pain interference scale declined from baseline to follow-up. These results supported the responsiveness of the BPI. The study confirmed that the BPI shows good psychometric properties of reliability, validity, and responsiveness, enabling it to be used to measure pain in patients after cardiac surgery. Validating pain measures for use in this population is an important part of establishing a foundation for future studies on chronic pain after cardiac surgery.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2007.01.010

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In surgical cardiac patients, the BPI pain interference subscale demonstrated good internal consistency before surgery (Cronbach's alpha = 0.91) and six months after surgery (Cronbach's alpha = 0.94), and it showed responsiveness between pre- and post-surgical time points.

    “In surgical cardiac patients, this measure demonstrated good internal consistency both prior to surgery (Cronbach’s α = 0.91) and six months following surgery (Cronbach’s α = 0.94) and demonstrated responsiveness between pre- and post-surgical time points (Gjeilo, Stenseth, Wahba, Lydersen, & Klepstad, 2007).”

    From Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Instruments: Reliability and Validity in Veterans Following Orthopedic Surgery. (2020) · cites this paper as Gjeilo, Stenseth, Wahba, Lydersen, & Klepstad, 2007

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 26

  1. [1]1. Anderson, K.O. ∙ Cleeland, C.S. The assessment of cancer pain Bruera, E.D. ∙ Portenoy, R.K. (Editors) Cancer pain. Assessment and management Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003; 51-66 Crossref Google Scholar
  2. [2]2. Cleeland, C.S. Pain assessment in cancer Osoba, D. (Editor) Effect of cancer on quality of life CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL, 1991; 293-305 Google Scholar
  3. [3]3. Cleeland, C.S. ∙ Ryan, K.M. Pain assessment: global use of the Brief Pain Inventory Ann Acad Med Singapore. 1994; 23:129-138 PubMed Google Scholar
  4. [5]5. Radbruch, L. ∙ Loick, G. ∙ Kiencke, P. ... Validation of the German version of the Brief Pain Inventory J Pain Symptom Manage. 1999; 18:180-187 Full Text Full Text (PDF) Scopus (284) PubMed Google Scholar
  5. [7]7. Keller, S. ∙ Bann, C.M. ∙ Dodd, S.L. ... Validity of the Brief Pain Inventory for use in documenting the outcomes of patients with noncancer pain Clin J Pain. 2004; 20:309-318 Crossref Scopus (971) PubMed Google Scholar
  6. [8]8. Williams, V.S. ∙ Smith, M.Y. ∙ Fehnel, S.E. The validity and utility of the BPI interference measures for evaluating the impact of osteoarthritic pain J Pain Symptom Manage. 2006; 31:48-57 Full Text Full Text (PDF) Scopus (66) PubMed Google Scholar
  7. [9]9. Lydick, E. ∙ Epstein, R.S. ∙ Himmelberger, D. ... Area under the curve: a metric for patient subjective responses in episodic diseases Qual Life Res. 1995; 4:41-45 Crossref Scopus (52) PubMed Google Scholar
  8. [10]10. Zelman, D.C. ∙ Gore, M. ∙ Dukes, E. ... Validity of a modified version of the Brief Pain Inventory for painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy J Vasc Nurs. 2005; 23:97-104 Full Text Full Text (PDF) Scopus (40) PubMed Google Scholar
  9. [11]11. Osborne, T.L. ∙ Raichle, K.A. ∙ Jensen, M.P. ... The reliability and validity of pain interference measures in persons with multiple sclerosis J Pain Symptom Manage. 2006; 32:217-229 Full Text Full Text (PDF) Scopus (71) PubMed Google Scholar
  10. [12]12. Tyler, E.J. ∙ Jensen, M.P. ∙ Engel, J.M. ... The reliability and validity of pain interference measures in persons with cerebral palsy Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002; 83:236-239 Full Text Full Text (PDF) Scopus (119) PubMed Google Scholar
  11. [13]13. Raichle, K.A. ∙ Osborne, T.L. ∙ Jensen, M.P. ... The reliability and validity of pain interference measures in persons with spinal cord injury J Pain. 2006; 7:179-186 Full Text Full Text (PDF) Scopus (121) PubMed Google Scholar
  12. [14]14. Zalon, M.L. Comparison of pain measures in surgical patients J Nurs Meas. 1999; 7:135-152 PubMed Google Scholar
  13. [15]15. Mendoza, T. ∙ Chen, C. ∙ Brugger, A. ... The utility and validity of the modified brief pain inventory in a multiple-dose postoperative analgesic trial Clin J Pain. 2004; 20:357-362 Crossref Scopus (142) PubMed Google Scholar
  14. [17]17. Hunt, J.O. ∙ Hendrata, M.V. ∙ Myles, P.S. Quality of life 12 months after coronary artery bypass graft surgery Heart Lung. 2000; 29:401-411 Full Text Full Text (PDF) Scopus (108) PubMed Google Scholar
  15. [18]18. Kalso, E. ∙ Mennander, S. ∙ Tasmuth, T. ... Chronic post-sternotomy pain Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2001; 45:935-939 Crossref Scopus (198) PubMed Google Scholar
  16. [19]19. Eisenberg, E. ∙ Pultorak, Y. ∙ Pud, D. ... Prevalence and characteristics of post coronary artery bypass graft surgery pain (PCP) Pain. 2001; 92:11-17 Full Text Full Text (PDF) Scopus (121) PubMed Google Scholar
  17. [20]20. Bruce, J. ∙ Drury, N. ∙ Poobalan, A.S. ... The prevalence of chronic chest and leg pain following cardiac surgery: a historical cohort study Pain. 2003; 104:265-273 Full Text Full Text (PDF) Scopus (177) PubMed Google Scholar
  18. [21]21. Taillefer, M.-C. ∙ Carrier, M. ∙ Bélisle, S. ... Prevalence, characteristics, and predictors of chronic nonanginal postoperative pain after cardiac operation: a cross-sectional study J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006; 131:1274-1280 Full Text Full Text (PDF) Scopus (96) PubMed Google Scholar
  19. [22]22. Watt-Watson, J. ∙ Stevens, B. ∙ Katz, J. ... Impact of preoperative education on pain outcomes after coronary artery bypass graft surgery Pain. 2004; 109:73-85 Full Text Full Text (PDF) Scopus (111) PubMed Google Scholar
  20. [23]23. Valdix, S.W. ∙ Puntillo, K.A. Pain, pain relief and accuracy of their recall after cardiac surgery Prog Cardiovasc Nurs. 1995; 10:3-11 PubMed Google Scholar
  21. [25]25. Loge, J.H. ∙ Kaasa, S. Short-form 36 (SF-36) health survey: normative data from the general Norwegian population Scand J Soc Med. 1998; 26:250-258 PubMed Google Scholar
  22. [26]26. Falcoz, P.E. ∙ Chocron, S. ∙ Mercier, M. ... Comparison of the Nottingham health profile and the 36-item health survey questionnaires in cardiac surgery Ann Thorac Surg. 2002; 73:1222-1228 Full Text Full Text (PDF) Scopus (69) PubMed Google Scholar
  23. [27]27. Nunnaly, J.C. ∙ Bernstein, I.H. Psychometric theory McGraw-Hill, New York, 1994 Google Scholar
  24. [28]28. Fayers, P.M. ∙ Machin, D. Quality of life. Assessment, analysis and interpretation John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester, 2000 Crossref Google Scholar
  25. [30]30. Saxena, A. ∙ Mendoza, T. ∙ Cleeland, C.S. The assessment of cancer pain in North India: the validation of the Hindi Brief Pain Inventory—BPI-H J Pain Symptom Manage. 1999; 17:27-41 Full Text Full Text (PDF) Scopus (107) PubMed Google Scholar
  26. [31]31. Guyatt, G. ∙ Walter, S. ∙ Norman, G. Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments J Chron Dis. 1987; 40:171-178

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gjeilo, K. H., Stenseth, R., Wahba, A., Lydersen, S., & Klepstad, P.
Affiliations
  • St Olav's University Hospital (NO)
  • Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
Corresponding author
Gjeilo, Kari Hanne
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-12
Volume
34
Issue
6
Pages
648-656
ISSN
0885-3924 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2007.01.010
OpenAlex
W1976666040
Cited by
100
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Pain and Symptom Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Anesthesia and Pain Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
Keywords
Brief Pain Inventory, cardiac surgery, postoperative pain, chronic pain, psychometric validation, pain intensity, pain interference, SF-36 bodily pain, construct validity, responsiveness, internal consistency
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Cardiac Surgical Procedures, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain Measurement, Postoperative Pain, Psychometrics, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review