Examinando por Autor "Intelangelo, L."

Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
  • Miniatura
    Ítem
    Instrumental validity and intra/inter-rater reliability of a novel low-cost digital pressure algometer
    (PeerJ Inc, 2020-10) Jerez-Mayorga, D.; dos Anjos, C.F.; de Cássia Macedo, M.; Fernandes, I.G.; Aedo-Muñoz, E.; Intelangelo, L.; Barbosa, A.C.
    Background: Pain assessment is a key measure that accompanies treatments in a wide range of clinical settings. A low-cost valid and reliable pressure algometer would allow objective assessment of pressure pain to assist a variety of health professionals. However, the pressure algometer is often expensive, which limits its daily use in both clinical and research settings. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the instrumental validity, and the intraand inter-rater reliability of an inexpensive digital adapted pressure algometer. Methods: A single rater applied 60 random compressions on a force platform. The pressure pain thresholds of 20 volunteers were collected twice (3 days apart) by two raters. The main outcome measurements were as follows: The maximal peak force (in kPa) and the pressure pain threshold (adapted pressure algometer vs. force platform). Cronbach's a test was used to assess internal consistency. The standard error of measurement provided estimates of measurement error, and the measurement bias was estimated with the Bland-Altman method, with lower and upper limits of agreement. Results: No differences were observed when comparing the compression results (P = 0.51). The validity and internal intra-rater consistencies ranged from 0.84 to 0.99, and the standard error of measurement from 0.005 to 0.04 kPa. Very strong (r = 0.73-0.74) to near-perfect (r = 0.99) correlations were found, with a low risk of bias for all measurements. The results demonstrated the validity and intra-rater reliability of the digitally adapted pressure algometer. Inter-rater reliability results were moderate (r = 0.55-0.60; Cronbach's a = 0.71-0.75). Conclusion: The adapted pressure algometer provide valid and reliable measurements of pressure pain threshold. The results support more widespread use of the pressure pain threshold method among clinicians. © 2020 Jerez-Mayorga et al.