13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
      - celebrating 25 years of open access

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      User-Centered Development of a Mobile App for Biopsychosocial Pain Assessment in Adults: Usability, Reliability, and Validity Study

      research-article
      , MSc 1 , , DPhil 2 , , DPhil 3 ,
      (Reviewer), (Reviewer)
      JMIR mHealth and uHealth
      JMIR Publications
      pain assessment, mobile app, validity, reliability, usability, mHealth, pain, user-centered design

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Pain-related mobile apps targeting pain assessment commonly limit pain assessment to pain behaviors and physiological aspects. However, current guidelines state that pain assessment should follow the biopsychosocial model, clearly addressing biological, psychological, and social aspects of the pain experience. Existing reviews also highlight that pain specialists and end users are not commonly involved in the development process of mobile apps for pain assessment, negatively affecting the quality of the available apps.

          Objective

          This study aimed to develop a mobile app for pain assessment (AvaliaDor) and assess its usability, validity, reliability, and measurement error in a sample of real patients with chronic pain recruited from a physiotherapy clinic.

          Methods

          This study was divided into 2 phases: phase 1—development of the AvaliaDor app; and phase 2—assessment of the apps’ usability, reliability, measurement error, and validity. AvaliaDor was developed (phase 1) based on the literature and the recommendations of physiotherapists and patients with pain in cycles of evaluation, inclusion of recommendations, and reevaluation until no further changes were required. The final version of the app was then tested in patients with musculoskeletal pain attending a private physiotherapy practice (phase 2) who were asked to use the app twice on 2 consecutive days for reliability purposes. In addition, participants had to complete a set of paper-based scales (Brief Pain Inventory, painDETECT, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, and Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia), which were used to assess the validity (criterion validity and hypothesis testing) of the app, and the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire was used to assess its usability.

          Results

          The development process (phase 1) included 5 physiotherapists external to the research team and 5 patients with musculoskeletal pain, and it resulted in the creation of an app named AvaliaDor, which includes an assessment of pain intensity, location, and phenotype; associated disability; and the issues of pain catastrophizing and fear of movement. A total of 52 patients with pain (mean age 50.12 years, SD 11.71 years; 39 females) participated in phase 2 and used the app twice. The Pearson correlation coefficient between the scores on the paper-based scales and the app ranged between 0.81 and 0.93 for criterion validity and between 0.41 and 0.59 for hypothesis testing. Test-retest reliability was moderate to good (intraclass correlation coefficient between 0.67 and 0.90) and the score for usability was 1.16 (SD 0.27), indicating good usability.

          Conclusions

          A mobile app named AvaliaDor was developed to assess the intensity, location, and phenotype of pain; associated disability; and the issues of pain catastrophizing and fear of movement in a user-centered design process. The app was shown to be usable, valid, and reliable for assessing pain from a biopsychosocial perspective in a heterogeneous group of patients with pain. Future work can explore the long-term use of AvaliaDor in clinical contexts and its advantages for the assessment and management of patients with pain.

          Related collections

          Most cited references49

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization

          Saturation has attained widespread acceptance as a methodological principle in qualitative research. It is commonly taken to indicate that, on the basis of the data that have been collected or analysed hitherto, further data collection and/or analysis are unnecessary. However, there appears to be uncertainty as to how saturation should be conceptualized, and inconsistencies in its use. In this paper, we look to clarify the nature, purposes and uses of saturation, and in doing so add to theoretical debate on the role of saturation across different methodologies. We identify four distinct approaches to saturation, which differ in terms of the extent to which an inductive or a deductive logic is adopted, and the relative emphasis on data collection, data analysis, and theorizing. We explore the purposes saturation might serve in relation to these different approaches, and the implications for how and when saturation will be sought. In examining these issues, we highlight the uncertain logic underlying saturation—as essentially a predictive statement about the unobserved based on the observed, a judgement that, we argue, results in equivocation, and may in part explain the confusion surrounding its use. We conclude that saturation should be operationalized in a way that is consistent with the research question(s), and the theoretical position and analytic framework adopted, but also that there should be some limit to its scope, so as not to risk saturation losing its coherence and potency if its conceptualization and uses are stretched too widely.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The Pain Catastrophizing Scale: Development and validation.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Pain assessment: global use of the Brief Pain Inventory.

              Poorly controlled cancer pain is a significant public health problem throughout the world. There are many barriers that lead to undertreatment of cancer pain. One important barrier is inadequate measurement and assessment of pain. To address this problem, the Pain Research Group of the WHO Collaborating Centre for Symptom Evaluation in Cancer Care has developed the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), a pain assessment tool for use with cancer patients. The BPI measures both the intensity of pain (sensory dimension) and interference of pain in the patient's life (reactive dimension). It also queries the patient about pain relief, pain quality, and patient perception of the cause of pain. This paper describes the development of the Brief Pain Inventory and the various applications to which the BPI is suited. The BPI is a powerful tool and, having demonstrated both reliability and validity across cultures and languages, is being adopted in many countries for clinical pain assessment, epidemiological studies, and in studies of the effectiveness of pain treatment.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                JMIR Mhealth Uhealth
                JMIR Mhealth Uhealth
                JMU
                JMIR mHealth and uHealth
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                2291-5222
                May 2021
                14 May 2021
                : 9
                : 5
                : e25316
                Affiliations
                [1 ] School of Health Sciences, University of Aveiro Aveiro Portugal
                [2 ] Higher School of Technology and Management of Águeda, Institute of Electronics and Telematics Engineering of Aveiro (IEETA), University of Aveiro Aveiro Portugal
                [3 ] Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS.UA), School of Health Sciences, University of Aveiro Aveiro Portugal
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Anabela G. Silva asilva@ 123456ua.pt
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4821-6084
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8415-9040
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4386-5851
                Article
                v9i5e25316
                10.2196/25316
                8164126
                33988515
                ea1d38db-d964-4554-ab09-0c49c39d3ebc
                ©Filipa Lopes, Mário Rodrigues, Anabela G Silva. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (https://mhealth.jmir.org), 14.05.2021.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://mhealth.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 27 October 2020
                : 2 December 2020
                : 21 December 2020
                : 8 March 2021
                Categories
                Original Paper
                Original Paper

                pain assessment,mobile app,validity,reliability,usability,mhealth,pain,user-centered design

                Comments

                Comment on this article