Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 26, 2026
Author Spotlight: Quantifying Pain Experience – An Illustrative Approach Using the Pain Body Diagram
Published on: July 7, 2023
Comparative Responsiveness of the PROMIS Pain Interference Short Forms, Brief Pain Inventory, PEG, and SF-36 Bodily
Jacob Kean1, Patrick O Monahan, Kurt Kroenke
1*VA Salt Lake City Health Care System †Health System Innovation and Research, Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT ‡Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine §Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Health Services Research and Development Service CIN 13-416, Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center, Center for Health Information and Communication ∥Regenstrief Institute ¶Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN #Center for Chronic Disease Outcomes Research, Minneapolis VA Health Care System **University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN.
Purpose:
To compare the sensitivity to change and the responsiveness to intervention of the PROMIS Pain Interference short forms, Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), 3-item PEG scale, and SF-36 Bodily Pain subscale in a sample of patients with persistent musculoskeletal pain of moderate severity.
Methods:
Standardized response means, standardized effect sizes, and receiver operating curve analyses were used to assess change between baseline and 3-month assessments in 250 participants who participated in a randomized clinical effectiveness trial of collaborative telecare management for moderate to severe and persistent musculoskeletal pain.
Results:
The BPI, PEG, and SF-36 Bodily Pain measures were more sensitive to patient-reported global change than the PROMIS Pain Interference short forms, especially for the clinically improved group, for which the change detected by the PROMIS short forms was not statistically significant. The BPI was more responsive to the clinical intervention than the SF-36 Bodily Pain and PROMIS Pain Interference measures. Post hoc analyses exploring these findings did not suggest that differences in content or rating scale structure (number of response options or anchoring language) adequately explained the observed differences in the detection of change.
Conclusions:
In this clinical trial, the BPI and PEG measures were better able to detect change than the SF-36 Bodily Pain and PROMIS Pain Interference measures.
More Related Videos
09:38Determining Pain Detection and Tolerance Thresholds Using an Integrated, Multi-Modal Pain Task Battery
Published on: April 14, 2016
06:28Biomechanical Changes Related to Low Back Pain: An Innovative Tool for Movement Pattern Assessment and Treatment Evaluation in Rehabilitation
Published on: December 13, 2024
