This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Nekolaichuk, C. L Articles by Lawlor, P. G Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Nekolaichuk, C. L Articles by Lawlor, P. G Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Cancer Pain Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A validation study of a pain classification system for advanced cancer patients using content experts: the Edmonton Classification System for Cancer Pain

Robin L Fainsinger

Peter G Lawlor

Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada

The purpose of this study was to gather construct validity evidence for a pain classification system for advanced cancer patients using content experts. Two expert panels, representing regional (Panel A, n / 18) and national/international (Panel B, n / 52) palliative medicine and pain specialists, were purposefully selected to participate in a modified Delphi survey technique, to evaluate an existing pain classification system, the Revised Edmonton Staging System (rESS). Each panel participated in two survey rounds, with response rates of 67% (Panel A, Round 1), 39% (Panel A, Round 2), 56% (Panel B, Round 1) and 64% (Panel B, Round 2). The rESS consists of five features: mechanism of pain, incidental pain, psychological distress, addictive behavior and cognitive function. Most participants either agreed or strongly agreed with including the five existing rESS features in a pain classification system, ranging from 67% (Panel A, cognitive function) to 100% (Panel B, mechanism of pain). Most participants suggested keeping the current definitions for these features, with some revisions. Based on participant feedback, definitions for incidental pain, psychological distress, addictive behavior and cognitive function were revised, including the development of guidelines for use. To reflect its intended use as a classification system, the name of the instrument was changed to the Edmonton Classification System for Cancer Pain (ECS-CP).

Key Words: cancer pain • construct validity • Delphi technique • pain assessment • pain classification • validation study

Palliative Medicine, Vol. 19, No. 6, 466-476 (2005)
DOI: 10.1191/0269216305pm1055oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Knudsen, N Aass, R Fainsinger, A Caraceni, P Klepstad, M Jordhoy, M. Hjermstad, and S Kaasa Classification of pain in cancer patients - a systematic literature review Palliative Medicine, June 1, 2009; 23(4): 295 - 308. [Abstract] [PDF]

				V Schulz, K Kozell, P. Biondo, C Stiles, K Tonkin, and N. Hagen The malignant wound assessment tool: a validation study using a Delphi approach Palliative Medicine, April 1, 2009; 23(3): 266 - 273. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. L. Fainsinger, A. Fairchild, C. Nekolaichuk, P. Lawlor, S. Lowe, and J. Hanson Is Pain Intensity a Predictor of the Complexity of Cancer Pain Management? J. Clin. Oncol., February 1, 2009; 27(4): 585 - 590. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Fainsinger Global warming in the palliative care research environment - adapting to change Palliative Medicine, June 1, 2008; 22(4): 328 - 335. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. G. Wilson, H. M. Chochinov, C. J. McPherson, K. LeMay, P. Allard, S. Chary, P. R. Gagnon, K. Macmillan, M. De Luca, F. O'Shea, et al. Suffering With Advanced Cancer J. Clin. Oncol., May 1, 2007; 25(13): 1691 - 1697. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. L. FAINSINGER, V. THAI, G. FRANK, and J. FERGUSSON What's in a Word? Addiction Versus Dependence in DSM-V Am J Psychiatry, November 1, 2006; 163(11): 2014 - 2014. [Full Text] [PDF]