Advertisement

Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery

, Volume 397, Issue 8, pp 1219–1224 | Cite as

Validation of a questionnaire for the assessment of pain following ventral hernia repair—the VHPQ

  • Leonard ClayEmail author
  • Ulf Fränneby
  • Gabriel Sandblom
  • Ulf Gunnarsson
  • Karin Strigård
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to create and evaluate the validity and reliability of a novel ventral hernia pain questionnaire (VHPQ) to assess pain following surgery for ventral hernia.

Methods

The questionnaire was constructed using focus groups and patient interviews. Validity was tested on 51 patients who responded to the VHPQ and brief pain inventory (BPI) 1 and 4 weeks following surgery. Reliability and internal consistency was tested on 74 patients who had surgery 3 years earlier and received the VHPQ and BPI on two separate occasions. Pain not related to surgery was examined on one occasion using the VHPQ on 100 non-operated people.

Results

For pain intensity items, a significant decrease was seen from week 1 to week 4 postoperative (p < 0.05). Spearman rank correlations were significant between the pain intensity items of the VHPQ and the BPI, tested 1 week postoperative (p < 0.05). Kappa levels for test–retest of items for interference with daily activities were higher than 0.5 for all items except one. Intra-class correlation was significant for pain intensity items (p < 0.05) in the test–retest group. Three years after surgery, the operated group stated more pain in the pain intensity items (p < 0.05) and more interference with daily activities (p < 0.05) than a non-operated group from the general population.

Conclusion

The validity and reliability of the VHPQ make it a useful tool in assessing postoperative pain and patient satisfaction.

Keywords

Ventral hernia Postoperative pain Pain assessment Pain questionnaire 

Notes

Conflicts of interest

None.

Supplementary material

423_2012_932_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (127 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 126 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Sauerland S, Walgenbach M, Habermalz B, Seiler CM, Miserez M (2011) Laparoscopic versus open surgical techniques for ventral or incisional hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD007781PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Korenkov M, Paul A, Sauerland S, Neugebauer E, Arndt M, Chevrel JP, Corcione F, Fingerhut A, Flament JB, Kux M, Matzinger A, Myrvold HE, Rath AM, Simmermacher RK (2001) Classification and surgical treatment of incisional hernia. Results of an experts' meeting. Langenbecks Arch Surg 386:65–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Franneby U, Gunnarsson U, Andersson M, Heuman R, Nordin P, Nyren O, Sandblom G (2008) Validation of an Inguinal Pain Questionnaire for assessment of chronic pain after groin hernia repair. Br J Surg 95:488–493PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fränneby U, Sandblom G, Nordin P, Nyrén O, Gunnarsson U (2006) Risk factors for long-term pain after hernia surgery. Ann Surg 244:212–219PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gunnarsson U, Johansson M, Strigård K (2011) Assessment of abdominal muscle function using the Biodex System-4. Validity and reliability in healthy volunteers and patients with giant ventral hernia. Hernia 15:417–421PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Snyder CW, Graham LA, Vick CC, Gray SH, Finan KR, Hawn MT (2011) Patient satisfaction, chronic pain, and quality of life after elective incisional hernia repair: effects of recurrence and repair technique. Hernia 15:123–129PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    den Hartog D, Dur AH, Tuinebreijer WE, Kreis RW (2008) Open surgical procedures for incisional hernias. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD006438Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kapischke M, Schulz T, Schipper T, Tensfeldt J, Caliebe A (2008) Open versus laparoscopic incisional hernia repair: something different from a meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 22:2251–2260PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tuveri M, Tuveri A, Nicolo E (2011) Repair of large abdominal incisional hernia by reconstructing the midline and use of an onlay of biological material. Am J Surg 202:e7–e11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tong WM, Hope W, Overby DW, Hultman CS (2011) Comparison of outcome after mesh-only repair, laparoscopic component separation, and open component separation. Ann Plast Surg 66:551–556PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sjödén PO, Bates S, Nyrén O (1983) Continuous self recording of epigastric pain with two rating scales: compliance, authenticity, reliability and sensitivity. J Behav Assess 5:327–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bland JM, Altman DG (1997) Cronbach’s alpha. Br Med J 314:572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Danillo M, Wyles SM, Carter F, Coleman MG, Hanna GB (2011) Development, validation and implementation of a monitoring tool for training in laparascopic colorectal surgery in the English National Training Program. Surg Endosc 25:1136–1142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kehlet H, Bay-Nielsen M, Kingsnorth A (2002) Chronic postherniorrhaphy pain—a call for uniform assessment. Hernia 6:178–181PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chapman CR, Casey KL, Dubner R, Foley KM, Gracely RH, Reading AE (1985) Pain measurement: an overview. Pain 22:1–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chapman CR, Gavrin J (1999) Suffering: the contributions of persistent pain. Lancet 353:2233–2237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Todd Heniford B et al (2008) Comparison of generic versus specific quality-of-life scales for mesh hernia repairs. J Am Coll Surg 206(4):638–644PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McCarthy M et al (2005) Visual analog scales for assessing surgical pain. J Am Coll Surg 201(2):245–252PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tait RC, Pollard CA (1987) The Pain Disability Index: psychometric and validity data. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 68(7):438–441PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Heniford BT, Walters AL, Lincourt AE, Novitsky YW, Hope WW, Kercher KW (2008) Comparison of generic versus specific quality-of-life scales for mesh hernia repairs. J Am Coll Surg 4:638–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leonard Clay
    • 1
    • 4
    Email author
  • Ulf Fränneby
    • 2
  • Gabriel Sandblom
    • 1
  • Ulf Gunnarsson
    • 1
  • Karin Strigård
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technique, Division of SurgeryKarolinska InstitutetStockholmSweden
  2. 2.Department of Clinical Research and Education, Division of SurgeryKarolinska InstitutetStockholmSweden
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryNorrlands University Hospital/Umeå UniversityUmeåSweden
  4. 4.Department of SurgeryKarolinska University HospitalStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations