PURPOSE The objectives of the study were to (1) assess the extent to which interrater reliability of pain drawing location and dispersion scoring methods are similar across pain disciplines in a sample of patients with cancer treatment-induced neuropathic pain (N = 56) and (2) investigate indicators of validity of the pain drawing in this unique sample. METHODS Patients undergoing cancer therapy completed the Brief Pain Inventory Body Map, the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory, and the McGill Pain Questionnaire. RESULTS Intraclass correlation coefficients among medical and psychology professionals ranged from .93-.99. Correlations between pain drawing score and symptom burden severity ranged from .29-.39; correlations between pain drawing score and symptom burden interference ranged from .28-.34. Patients who endorsed pain in the hands and feet more often described their pain as electric, numb, and shooting than patients without pain in the hands and feet. They also endorsed significantly more descriptors of neuropathic pain. CONCLUSIONS Results suggest a similar understanding among members of a multidisciplinary pain team as to the location and dispersion of pain as represented by patients' pain drawings. In addition, pain drawing scores were related to symptom burden severity and interference and descriptors of neuropathic pain in expected ways.

中文翻译：

---

疼痛绘图的心理测量学研究。

目的 本研究的目的是 (1) 评估癌症治疗引起的神经性疼痛患者样本 (N = 56) 中疼痛绘制位置和分散评分方法在疼痛学科中的评估者间可靠性的相似程度和 ( 2) 在这个独特的样本中调查疼痛绘制的有效性指标。方法 接受癌症治疗的患者完成了简要疼痛清单身体图、MD Anderson 症状清单和 McGill 疼痛问卷。结果医学和心理学专业人士的组内相关系数范围为 0.93-0.99。疼痛绘制评分与症状负担严重程度之间的相关性范围为 0.29-0.39；疼痛绘图评分和症状负担干扰之间的相关性范围为 0.28-0.34。认可手脚疼痛的患者比没有手脚疼痛的患者更常将其疼痛描述为电击、麻木和射击。他们还支持更多的神经性疼痛描述。结论 结果表明，多学科疼痛团队的成员对患者疼痛图所代表的疼痛的位置和分散有相似的理解。此外，疼痛绘图评分与症状负担严重程度和干扰以及神经性疼痛的描述有关。结论 结果表明，多学科疼痛团队的成员对患者疼痛图所代表的疼痛的位置和分散有相似的理解。此外，疼痛绘图评分与症状负担严重程度和干扰以及神经性疼痛的描述有关。结论 结果表明，多学科疼痛团队的成员对患者疼痛图所代表的疼痛的位置和分散有相似的理解。此外，疼痛绘图评分与症状负担严重程度和干扰以及神经性疼痛的描述有关。