• Dianne J Crellin, Denise Harrison, Adrian Hutchinson, Tibor Schuster, Nick Santamaria, and Franz E Babl.
• Department of Nursing, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
• BMJ Open. 2017 Sep 6; 7 (9): e016225.

IntroductionInfants and children are frequently exposed to painful medical procedures such as immunisation, blood sampling and intravenous access. Over 40 scales for pain assessment are available, many designed for neonatal or postoperative pain. What is not well understood is how well these scales perform when used to assess procedural pain in infants and children.AimThe aim of this study was to test the psychometric and practical properties of the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) scale, the Modified Behavioural Pain Scale (MBPS) and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) observer pain scale to quantify procedural pain intensity in infants and children aged from 6-42 months to determine their suitability for clinical and research purposes.Methods And AnalysisA prospective observational non-interventional study conducted at a single centre. The psychometric and practical performance of the FLACC scale, MBPS and the VAS observer pain scale and VAS observer distress scale used to assess children experiencing procedural pain will be assessed. Infants and young children aged 6-42 months undergoing one of four painful and/or distressing procedures were recruited and the procedure digitally video recorded. Clinicians and psychologists will be recruited to independently apply the scales to these video recordings to establish intrarater and inter-rater reliability, convergent validity responsiveness and specificity. Pain score distributions will be presented descriptively; reliability will be assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman plots. Spearman correlations will be used to assess convergence and linear mixed modelling to explore the responsiveness of the scales to pain and their capacity to distinguish between pain and distress.Ethics And DisseminationEthical approval was provided by the Royal Children's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee, approval number 35220B. The findings of this study will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences.© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

21 keywords...

hide…