Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 23, 2025
Objective Nociceptive Assessment in Ventilated ICU Patients: A Feasibility Study Using Pupillometry and the Nociceptive Flexion Reflex
Published on: July 4, 2018
Behaviour-based pain scales: Validity and interrater reliability of BPS-NI and PAINAD-G on general wards
Jan D Wandrey1, Niklas Behnel1, Elisa Weidner1
1Department of Anaesthesiology and Operative Intensive Care, Campus Charité Mitte and Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany.
Background:
Measuring pain intensity in patients unable to communicate is a challenge on general wards. Observation-based pain scoring tools have been used for patients with dementia or in critically ill intensive care unit (ICU) patients. However, there is no established or validated assessment tool for non-ICU patients without dementia related cognitive deficiencies who cannot communicate. The "Behavioural Pain Scale Non-Intubated" (BPS-NI) and the "Pain Assessment In Advanced Dementia-German" (PAINAD-G) are potential tools to fill this gap.
Methods:
This study was performed with verbal non-ICU patients on general wards at Charité Berlin. Two assessors independently rated pain intensity using the BPS-NI and the PAINAD-G along with patients' self-ratings on the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). The interrater-reliability of BPS-NI and PAINAD-G was calculated and ROC-analyses were performed to identify cut-off values for medium and intense pain for each score. Effectiveness was calculated using percentage agreement. In total, 126 patients were included into analysis.
Results:
The BPS-NI showed substantial congruence in interrater-reliability (Cohens-Kappa 0.71), whereas the PAINAD-G showed moderate congruence (Kappa 0.48). Based on ROC-analyses, for medium pain levels a cut-off 4 (BPS-NI) or 2 (PAINAD-G) and for severe pain levels cut-off 5 (BPS-NI) and 3 (PAINAD-G) would result in good accordance with self-reported NRS for pain.
Conclusion:
The BPS-NI shows a good validity in measuring pain intensity in patients on general wards and may possibly be used for patients unable to communicate. Using defined cut-off values for BPS-NI and PAINAD-G, clinically relevant pain intensities in patients can reliably be detected.
Significance:
Measuring the pain intensity in patients unable to communicate is a common challenge on general wards. This study assessed reliability and applicability BPS-NI and the PAINAD-G in a general ward setting. Furthermore, it provides cut-off values in order to estimate pain intensity and support analgesic response.
Related Concept Videos
01:21Methods of Documentation III: PIE
01:25Assessment of apical radial pulse
The A-R pulse assessment involves simultaneous evaluation of the apical and radial pulses. When the apical and radial pulse rates vary, this assessment helps identify a pulse deficit.
Pre-Procedural Preparation
01:03Data Validation
Nursing assessment guides are generally based on holistic models rather than medical...
01:22Self-Report Tests of Personality
01:30Guidelines for Nursing Documentation I
Factual:
The following points emphasize the significance of upholding accurate and unbiased documentation in healthcare.
01:26Guidelines for Nursing Documentation II
Timely documentation is crucial to ensure continuity of care for patients. Any delays in recording or reporting medical information can result in medical errors and even adverse patient outcomes. From medication administration to diagnostic test results, every detail must be accurately and promptly documented to provide the best possible care for patients.