A scale for rating the quality of psychological trials for pain

Academic Unit of Psychiatry and Behavioural Sciences, University of Leeds, 15 Hyde Terrace, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.
Pain (Impact Factor: 5.21). 11/2005; 117(3):314-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2005.06.018
Source: PubMed


This paper reports the development of a scale for assessing the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials for psychological treatments. The Delphi method was used in which a panel of 15-12 experts generated statements relating to treatment and design components of trials. After three rounds, statements with high consensus agreement were reviewed by a second expert panel and rewritten as a scale. Evidence to support the reliability and validity of the scale is reported. Three expert and five novice raters assessed sets of 31 and 25 published trials to establish scale reliability (ICC ranges from 0.91 to 0.41 for experts and novices, respectively) and item reliability (Kappa and inter-rater agreement). The total scale score discriminated between trials globally judged as good and poor by experts, and trial quality was shown to be a function of year of publication. Uses for the scale are suggested.

88 Reads
  • Source
    • "Further exploration will be needed to clarify differences in efficacy between hypnosis and guided imagery or PMR. TA and HF rated methodological quality using procedures described in Yates et al. (2005). All methodological quality indices revealed lower scores as compared to previous studies (Eccleston, Palermo, et al., 2009; Eccleston, Williams, et al., 2009). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Hypnosis is regarded as an effective treatment for psychological and physical ailments. However, its efficacy as a strategy for managing chronic pain has not been assessed through meta-analytical methods. The objective of the current study was to conduct a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of hypnosis for managing chronic pain. When compared with standard care, hypnosis provided moderate treatment benefit. Hypnosis also showed a moderate superior effect as compared to other psychological interventions for a nonheadache group. The results suggest that hypnosis is efficacious for managing chronic pain. Given that large heterogeneity among the included studies was identified, the nature of hypnosis treatment is further discussed.
    International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis 11/2013; 62(1):1-28. DOI:10.1080/00207144.2013.841471 · 1.38 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Assessment of quality of included studies A quality rating scale designed specifically for studies of psychological treatments in chronic pain was applied (Yates 2005). All papers were scored by two of the review authors and consensus reached after initial comparison of ratings. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Psychological therapies (e.g. relaxation, hypnosis, coping skills training, biofeedback, and cognitive behavioural therapy) may help people manage pain and its disabling consequences. Therapies can be delivered face-to-face by a therapist, via the Internet, by telephone call, or by computer programme. This review focuses on treatments that are delivered face-to-face by a therapist. For children and adolescents there is evidence that both relaxation and cognitive behavioural therapy (treatment that helps people test and revise their thoughts and actions) are effective in reducing the intensity of pain in chronic headache, recurrent abdominal pain, fibromyalgia, and sickle cell disease immediately after treatment. Psychological therapies also have a lasting effect in reducing pain and disability for chronic headache. Fifty-six per cent of children who were treated with psychological therapies reported less pain compared with 22% of children who did not receive a psychological therapy. Anxiety was also reduced for children with headaches immediately following treatment. Psychological therapies also reduce pain and disability for children with mixed pain conditions (excluding headache) immediately following treatment. However, we did not find that any treatment effects were maintained at follow-up (between 3-12 months after the end of treatment) for children with mixed pain conditions. Psychological therapies did not produce changes in depression in children with either headache or non-headache conditions, and anxiety did not change in children with non-headache conditions receiving psychological therapies. More studies are needed to understand whether psychological therapies can improve depression and anxiety and have more lasting effects on pain and disability in other groups of young people who have chronic pain.
    Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 12/2012; 12(12):CD003968. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD003968.pub3 · 6.03 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "A panel usually consists of 15 to 30 participants [18], between 12 and 20 being considered optimal [18,20]. Typically three rounds of questionnaires are sent to the expert panel, although the decision over the number of rounds is largely pragmatic and often varies between two and four partly depending on the quality and rates of response [20-22]. Participants’ responses are anonymised to ensure that the influence of peer pressure on respondents’ opinions is minimised [23]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Best current estimates of neuropathic pain (NeuP) prevalence come from studies using various screening detecting pain with probable neuropathic features; the proportion experiencing significant, long-term NeuP, and the proportion not responding to standard treatment are unknown. These "refractory" cases are the most clinically important to detect, being the most severe, requiring specialist treatment. We report an international Delphi survey of experts in NeuP, aiming for consensus on the features required to define, for epidemiological research: (1) neuropathic pain; and (2) when NeuP is "refractory". A web-based questionnaire was developed and data collected from three rounds of questionnaires from nineteen experts. There was good consensus on essential inclusion of six items to identify NeuP ("prickling, tingling, pins & needles", "pain evoked by light touch", "electric shocks or shooting pain", "hot or burning" pain, "brush allodynia on self-examination", and "relevant history") and on some items that were non-essential. Consensus was also reached on components of a "refractory NeuP" definition: minimum duration (one year); number of trials of drugs of known effectiveness (four); adequate duration of these trials (three months / maximum tolerated); outcomes of treatment (pain severity, quality of life). Further work needs to validate these proposed criteria in general population research. This paper presents an international consensus on measuring the epidemiology of refractory neuropathic pain. This will be valuable in reaching an agreed estimate of the prevalence of neuropathic pain, and the first estimate of refractory neuropathic pain prevalence.
    BMC Neurology 05/2012; 12(1):29. DOI:10.1186/1471-2377-12-29 · 2.04 Impact Factor
Show more