Objective. This study aimed to validate Italian versions of Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) scale and Pain DETECT questionnaire (PD-Q) and evaluate the ability of these questionnaires to discriminate between nociceptive and neuropathic pain. Design. Multicenter prospective validation cohort study. Subjects and Setting. One hundred patients were included with a diagnosis formulated by a specialist in outpatient settings (50 affected by knee osteoarthritis as nociceptive pain and 50 affected by trigeminal or postherpetic neuralgia as neuropathic pain). Methods. The Italian versions of both questionnaires according to Italian cultural characteristics were performed according to the following steps: (1) translation of the questionnaires from English into Italian; (2) review by a bilingual individual for consistency; (3) proposed version after a mail round between experts; (4) backward translation; (5) comparison with the original English version by the experts; (6) approved version of the questionnaires. One hundred patients were enrolled and completed the two questionnaires administered by a specialist or blinded nursing staff, at the baseline and after 24/48 hours. Internal consistency, stability, validity, and discriminative power were analyzed. Results. Statistically significant differences were reported about the ability of both questionnaires to discriminate between patients affected by neuropathic or nociceptive pain. Internal consistency for the Italian version of the LANSS was 0.76, and for PD-Q, it was 0.80, assessed by Cronbach’s α; LANSS showed a good test-retest reliability with an ICC of 0.76, and PD-Q showed a high test-retest reliability with an ICC of 0.96. For interrater reliability, there was a concordance rate of 83.3% between reference diagnosis and LANSS (Cohen’s kappa = 0.67, CI 95% 0.52–0.75). Conclusions. This study validated the Italian versions of LANSS and PD-Q as reliable instruments with good psychometric characteristics, for pain evaluation, discriminating between nociceptive and neuropathic pain. Our findings were similar to those observed in the original study. Furthermore, we have reported the test-retest reliability for both questionnaires, not addressed in original validation studies.

中文翻译：

---

利兹对神经病性症状和体征量表和疼痛检测的利兹评估意大利语版本的跨文化适应和验证，用于区分伤害性疼痛和神经性疼痛

目标。这项研究旨在验证意大利语版本的利兹神经病症状和体征评估（LANSS）量表和疼痛检测问卷（PD-Q），并评估这些问卷区分伤害性疼痛和神经性疼痛的能力。设计。多中心前瞻性验证队列研究。主题和设置。包括一百名患者，由专家在门诊进行诊断（其中50例受膝骨关节炎影响为伤害性疼痛，50例因三叉神经或带状疱疹后遗神经痛影响为神经性疼痛）。方法。根据意大利文化特征的两种问卷的意大利语版本均按照以下步骤进行：（1）将问卷从英语翻译成意大利语；（2）由双语人士复核是否一致；（3）专家间回信后的建议版本；（4）向后翻译；（五）专家与英文原版的比较；（6）批准版的问卷。在基线和24/48小时后，招募了一百名患者并完成了由专家或盲人护理人员管理的两份问卷调查。内部一致性，稳定性，有效性和判别力进行了分析。结果。据报道，两种调查表区分受神经性疼痛或伤害性疼痛影响的患者的能力在统计学上均存在显着差异。意大利语版本的LANSS的内部一致性为0.76，PD-Q的内部一致性为0.80（根据Cronbach的α评估）；LANSS显示良好的重测可靠性，ICC为0.76，PD-Q显示较高的重测可靠性，ICC为0.96。为了获得可靠的可靠性，参考诊断与LANSS之间的一致性率为83.3％（科恩卡帕值= 0.67，可信度95％0.52-0.75）。结论。这项研究验证了意大利语版本的LANSS和PD-Q是具有良好心理计量学特征的可靠工具，可用于疼痛评估，区分伤害性疼痛和神经性疼痛。我们的发现与原始研究中观察到的相似。此外，我们已经报告了两种问卷的重测信度，但原始验证研究中未涉及。