Spinal Cord Injury Pain Instrument and painDETECT questionnaire: Convergent construct validity in individuals with Spinal Cord Injury.

BACKGROUND: Neuropathic pain (NeuP) is a frequent sequel of spinal cord injury (SCI). The SCI Pain Instrument (SCIPI) was developed as a SCI-specific NeuP screening tool. A preliminary validation reported encouraging results requiring further evaluation in terms of psychometric properties. The painDETECT questionnaire (PDQ), a commonly applied NeuP assessment tool, was primarily validated in German, but not specifically developed for SCI and not yet validated according to current diagnostic guidelines. We aimed to provide convergent construct validity and to identify the optimal item combination for the SCIPI. The PDQ was re-evaluated according to current guidelines with respect to SCI-related NeuP. METHODS: Prospective monocentric study. Subjects received a neurological examination according to the International Standards for Neurological Classification of SCI. After linguistic validation of the SCIPI, the IASP-grading system served as reference to diagnose NeuP, accompanied by the PDQ after its re-evaluation as binary classifier. Statistics were evaluated through ROC-analysis, with the area under the ROC curve (AUROC) as optimality criterion. The SCIPI was refined by systematic item permutation. RESULTS: Eighty-eight individuals were assessed with the German SCIPI. Of 127 possible combinations, a 4-item-SCIPI (cut-off-score = 1.5/sensitivity = 0.864/specificity = 0.839) was identified as most reasonable. The SCIPI showed a strong correlation (rsp  = 0.76) with PDQ. ROC-analysis of SCIPI/PDQ (AUROC = 0.877) revealed comparable results to SCIPI/IASP (AUROC = 0.916). ROC-analysis of PDQ/IASP delivered a score threshold of 10.5 (sensitivity = 0.727/specificity = 0.903). CONCLUSION: The SCIPI is a valid easy-to-apply NeuP screening tool in SCI. The PDQ is recommended as complementary NeuP assessment tool in SCI, e.g. to monitor pain severity and/or its time-dependent course. SIGNIFICANCE: In SCI-related pain, both SCIPI and PainDETECT show strong convergent construct validity versus the current IASP-grading system. SCIPI is now optimized from a 7-item to an easy-to-apply 4-item screening tool in German and English. We provided evidence that the scope for PainDETECT can be expanded to individuals with SCI.

The CanPain SCI Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rehabilitation Management of Neuropathic Pain after Spinal Cord: introduction, methodology and recommendation overview.

STUDY DESIGN: Clinical practice guidelines. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to develop the first Canadian clinical practice guidelines for the management of neuropathic pain in people with spinal cord injury (SCI). SETTING: The guidelines are relevant for inpatient and outpatient SCI rehabilitation settings in Canada. METHODS: The guidelines were developed in accordance with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool. A Steering Committee and Working Group reviewed the relevant evidence on neuropathic pain management (encompassing screening and diagnosis, treatment and models of care) after SCI. The quality of evidence was scored using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). A consensus process was followed to achieve agreement on recommendations and clinical considerations. RESULTS: The Working Group developed 12 recommendations for screening and diagnosis, 12 recommendations for treatment and 5 recommendations for models of care. Important clinical considerations accompany each recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: The Working Group recommendations for the management of neuropathic pain after SCI should be used to inform practice.

The CanPain SCI Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rehabilitation Management of Neuropathic Pain after Spinal Cord: Recommendations for treatment.

STUDY DESIGN: Clinical practice guidelines. OBJECTIVES: To develop the first Canadian clinical practice guidelines for treatment of neuropathic pain in people with spinal cord injury (SCI). SETTING: The guidelines are relevant for inpatient and outpatient SCI rehabilitation settings in Canada. METHODS: The CanPainSCI Working Group reviewed the evidence for different treatment options and achieved consensus. The Working Group then developed clinical considerations for each recommendation. Recommendations for research are also included. RESULTS: Twelve recommendations were developed for the management of neuropathic pain after SCI. The recommendations address both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment modalities. CONCLUSIONS: An expert Working Group developed recommendations for the treatment of neuropathic pain after SCI that should be used to inform practice.

The CanPain SCI Clinical Practice Guideline for Rehabilitation Management of Neuropathic Pain after Spinal Cord: recommendations for model systems of care.

STUDY DESIGN: Clinical practice guidelines. OBJECTIVES: The project objectives were to develop the first Canadian recommendations on a model of care for the management of at- and below-level neuropathic pain in people with spinal cord injury (SCI). SETTING: The guidelines are relevant for inpatient and outpatient SCI rehabilitation settings in Canada. METHODS: On the basis of a review of the Accreditation Canada standards, the Steering Committee developed questions to guide the CanPainSCI Working Group when developing the recommendations. The Working Group agreed on recommendations through a consensus process. RESULTS: The Working Group developed five recommendations for the organization of neuropathic pain rehabilitation care in people with SCI. CONCLUSIONS: The Working Group recommendations for a model of care for at- and below-level neuropathic pain after SCI should be used to inform clinical practice.

The CanPain SCI Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rehabilitation Management of Neuropathic Pain after Spinal Cord: screening and diagnosis recommendations.

STUDY DESIGN: Clinical practice guidelines. OBJECTIVES: To develop the first Canadian clinical practice guidelines for screening and diagnosis of neuropathic pain in people with spinal cord injury (SCI). SETTING: The guidelines are relevant for inpatient and outpatient SCI rehabilitation settings in Canada. METHODS: The CanPainSCI Working Group reviewed evidence to address clinical questions regarding screening and diagnosis of neuropathic pain after SCI. A consensus process was followed to achieve agreement on recommendations and clinical considerations. RESULTS: Twelve recommendations, based on expert consensus, were developed for the screening and diagnosis of neuropathic pain after SCI. The recommendations address methods for assessment, documentation tools, team member accountability, frequency of screening and considerations for diagnostic investigation. Important clinical considerations accompany each recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: The expert Working Group developed recommendations for the screening and diagnosis of neuropathic pain after SCI that should be used to inform practice.

The International Spinal Cord Injury Pain Extended Data Set (Version 1.0).

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to develop the International Spinal Cord Injury Pain Extended Data Set (ISCIPEDS) with the purpose of guiding the assessment and treatment of pain after spinal cord injury (SCI). SETTING: International. METHODS: The ISCIPEDS was reviewed by members of the International SCI Data Sets Committee, the International Spinal Cord Society Executive and Scientific Committees, American Spinal Injury Association and American Pain Society Boards, and the Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain, individual reviewers and societies. RESULTS: The working group recommended four assessment domains for the ISCIPEDS: (i) Pain symptoms including variables related to pain type, temporal course, severity, unpleasantness, tolerability of pain and questionnaires assessing pain type and symptom severity; (ii) Sensory signs to detect and quantify sensory abnormalities commonly associated with neuropathic pain, including dynamic mechanical and thermal allodynia, and hyperalgesia; (iii) Treatments (ongoing and past 12 months); and (iv) Psychosocial factors and comorbid conditions. CONCLUSION: The ISCIPEDS was designed to be used together with the International SCI Pain Basic Data Set and provide a brief yet thorough assessment of domains related to chronic pain in individuals with SCI. The data set includes pain-relevant self-reported assessments, questionnaires and sensory examinations. The recommendations were based on (i) their relevance to individuals with SCI and chronic pain, (ii) the existence of published findings supporting the utility of the selected measures for use in individuals with SCI, and to the greatest extent possible (iii) their availability in the public domain free of charge.

Screening for neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury with the spinal cord injury pain instrument (SCIPI): a preliminary validation study.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. OBJECTIVE: To preliminarily evaluate the validity of an interview-based spinal cord injury (SCI) neuropathic pain screening instrument. SETTING: Six university-based SCI centers in the United States. METHODS: Clinician diagnoses of neuropathic pain (NP) and non-neuropathic pain subtypes were collected independently of descriptions of the pain characteristics provided by the persons with SCI by using the Spinal Cord Injury Pain Instrument (SCIPI); SCIPI information and physician diagnoses for 82 pain sites of which they were most confident were subsequently compared. RESULTS: Four of the SCIPI items correlated significantly with the NP subtype as determined by the clinician. The best cutoff score for identifying NP was an endorsement of two or more of these four items. Using this cutoff, sensitivity of the SCIPI was 78%, specificity was 73% and overall diagnostic accuracy was 76%. CONCLUSION: In this preliminary study, the SCIPI, which can be administered by a nonclinician, appears to have good sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy in a SCI population; it may have a role as a screening tool for NP after SCI. Further study is needed.

The International Spinal Cord Injury Pain Basic Data Set (version 2.0).

OBJECTIVES: To revise the International Spinal Cord Injury Pain Basic Data Set (ISCIPBDS) based on new developments in the field and on suggestions from the spinal cord injury (SCI) and pain clinical and research community. SETTING: International. METHODS: The ISCIPBDS working group evaluated suggestions regarding the utility of the ISCIPBDS and made modifications in response to these and to significant developments in the field. The revised ISCIPBDS (version 2.0) was reviewed by members of the Executive Committee of the International SCI Standards and Data Sets, the International Spinal Cord Society (ISCoS) Executive and Scientific Committees, the American Spinal Injury Association and American Pain Society Boards and the Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain, individual reviewers and societies and the ISCoS Council. RESULTS: The ISCIPBDS (version 2.0) is significantly shortened but still contains clinically relevant core questions concerning SCI-related pain. The revisions include an updated SCI pain classification, omission of three questions regarding temporal pain pattern and three pain interference questions. The remaining three pain interference questions concern perceived interference with activities, mood and sleep for overall pain rather than for individual pain problems and are scored on a 0 to 10 scale.

International Spinal Cord Injury Pain (ISCIP) Classification: Part 2. Initial validation using vignettes.

STUDY DESIGN: International validation study using self-administered surveys. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the utility and reliability of the International Spinal Cord Injury Pain (ISCIP) Classification as used by clinicians. METHODS: Seventy-five clinical vignettes (case histories) were prepared by the members of the ISCIP Classification group and assigned to a category by consensus. Vignettes were incorporated into an Internet survey distributed to clinicians. Clinicians were asked, for each vignette, to decide on the number of pain components present and to classify each using the ISCIP Classification. RESULTS: The average respondent had 86% of the questions on the number of pain components correct. The overall correctness in determining whether pain was nociceptive was 79%, whereas the correctness in determining whether pain was neuropathic was 77%. Correctness in determining if pain was musculoskeletal was 84%, whereas for visceral pain, neuropathic at-level spinal cord injury (SCI) and below-level SCI pain it was 85%, 57% and 73%, respectively. Using strict criteria, the overall correctness in determining pain type was 68% (versus an expected 95%), but with maximally relaxed criteria, it increased to 85%. CONCLUSIONS: The reliability of use of the ISCIP Classification by clinicians (who received minimal training in its use) using a clinical vignette approach is moderate. Some subtypes of pain proved challenging to classify. The ISCIP should be tested for reliability by applying it to real persons with pain after SCI. Based on the results of this validation process, the instructions accompanying the ISCIP Classification for classifying subtypes of pain have been clarified.

International spinal cord injury pain classification: part I. Background and description. March 6-7, 2009.

STUDY DESIGN: Discussion of issues and development of consensus. OBJECTIVE: Present the background, purpose, development process, format and definitions of the International Spinal Cord Injury Pain (ISCIP) Classification. METHODS: An international group of spinal cord injury (SCI) and pain experts deliberated over 2 days, and then via e-mail communication developed a consensus classification of pain after SCI. The classification was reviewed by members of several professional organizations and their feedback was incorporated. The classification then underwent validation by an international group of clinicians with minimal exposure to the classification, using case study vignettes. Based upon the results of this study, further revisions were made to the ISCIP Classification. RESULTS: An overall structure and terminology has been developed and partially validated as a merger of and improvement on previously published SCI pain classifications, combined with basic definitions proposed by the International Association for the Study of Pain and pain characteristics described in published empiric studies of pain. The classification is designed to be comprehensive and to include pains that are directly related to the SCI pathology as well as pains that are common after SCI but are not necessarily mechanistically related to the SCI itself. CONCLUSIONS: The format and definitions presented should help experienced and non-experienced clinicians as well as clinical researchers classify pain after SCI.

Outcome measures in spinal cord injury: recent assessments and recommendations for future directions.

STUDY DESIGN: Review by the spinal cord outcomes partnership endeavor (SCOPE), which is a broad-based international consortium of scientists and clinical researchers representing academic institutions, industry, government agencies, not-for-profit organizations and foundations. OBJECTIVES: Assessment of current and evolving tools for evaluating human spinal cord injury (SCI) outcomes for both clinical diagnosis and clinical research studies. METHODS: a framework for the appraisal of evidence of metric properties was used to examine outcome tools or tests for accuracy, sensitivity, reliability and validity for human SCI. RESULTS: Imaging, neurological, functional, autonomic, sexual health, bladder/bowel, pain and psychosocial tools were evaluated. Several specific tools for human SCI studies have or are being developed to allow the more accurate determination for a clinically meaningful benefit (improvement in functional outcome or quality of life) being achieved as a result of a therapeutic intervention. CONCLUSION: Significant progress has been made, but further validation studies are required to identify the most appropriate tools for specific targets in a human SCI study or clinical trial.

Pain after spinal cord injury.

Evaluation of pain in a person with SCI should commence with a determination of the neurologic level and the completeness of injury. The pain then can be localized to one of three regions: above level, at level, or below level. The regional pain then should be categorized either as nociceptive or neuropathic and, after this, subdivided into a specific subtype. An evidence based treatment plan can be devised depending on the specific subtype, which may include physical measures, pharmacologic treatments, behavioral interventions, surgery, or an eclectic combination program. The treatment plan usually can provide some relief for any of the subtypes, although complete relief often is not possible.