Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the PROMIS pain quality item bank

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The assessment of pain sensation and quality is a key component in understanding the experience of individuals with chronic pain. This study evaluated the factor structure of the patient-reported outcome measurement information system (PROMIS) pain quality item bank.

Methods

As part of the PROMIS project, we developed a pool of 37 pain quality items, based on a review of existing pain questionnaires and development of new items. A web-based survey was designed and completed by 845 members of the general population and 967 individuals with different types of chronic pain. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted on a random split-half sample of the data to examine the factor structure of the 37 PROMIS pain quality items in the general population and in a chronic pain sample. A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted in the holdout sample.

Results

The EFA of the pain quality items resulted in comparable six-factor solutions for the general and chronic pain samples: (1) pulling/tugging pain; (2) tingling/numbness pain; (3) sharp/stabbing pain; (4) dull/aching pain; (5) pounding/pulsing pain; and (6) affective pain. The confirmatory factor analysis in the holdout sample supported this factor structure.

Conclusions

Further research is needed to evaluate the psychometric characteristics of the derived scales based on their factor scores.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dworkin, R. H., Turk, D. C., Farrar, J. T., Haythornthwaite, J. A., Jensen, M. P., Katz, N. P., et al. (2005). Core outcome measures for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain, 113(1–2), 9–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Price, D. D., Harkins, S. W., & Baker, C. (1987). Sensory-affective relationships among different types of clinical and experimental pain. Pain, 28(3), 297–307.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Jensen, M. P. (2003). The validity and reliability of pain measures for use in clinical trials in adults. In Presented at the second meeting of the initiative on methods, measurement, and pain assessment in clinical trials (IMMPACT-II).

  4. Price, D. D. (1999). Psychological mechanisms of pain and analgesia. Seattle: IASP Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Melzack, R. (1975). The McGill Pain Questionnaire: Major properties and scoring methods. Pain, 1(3), 277–299.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Melzack, R., & Katz, J. (2001). The McGill Pain Questionnaire: Appraisal and current status. In D. C. Turk & R. Melzack (Eds.), Handbook of pain assessment (2nd ed., pp. 659–692). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Melzack, R. (1987). The short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire. Pain, 30(2), 191–197.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Beattie, P. F., Dowda, M., & Feuerstein, M. (2004). Differentiating sensory and affective-sensory pain descriptions in patients undergoing magnetic resonance imaging for persistent low back pain. Pain, 110(1–2), 189–196. doi:10.1016/j.pain.2004.03.026.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Dworkin, R. H., Turk, D. C., Revicki, D. A., Harding, G., Coyne, K. S., Peirce-Sandner, S., et al. (2009). Development and initial validation of an expanded and revised version of the Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ-2). Pain, 144(1–2), 35–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Clark, W. C., Kuhl, J. P., Keohan, M. L., Knotkova, H., Winer, R. T., & Griswold, G. A. (2003). Factor analysis validates the cluster structure of the dendrogram underlying the multidimensional affect and pain survey (MAPS) and challenges the a priori classification of the descriptors in the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ). Pain, 106(3), 357–363.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jensen, M. P., Gammaitoni, A. R., Olaleye, D. O., Oleka, N., Nalamachu, S. R., & Galer, B. S. (2006). The pain quality assessment scale: Assessment of pain quality in carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of Pain, 7(11), 823–832.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Byrne, M., Troy, A., Bradley, L. A., Marchisello, P. J., Geisinger, K. F., Van der Heide, L. H., et al. (1982). Cross-validation of the factor structure of the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Pain, 13(2), 193–201.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Crockett, D. J., Prkachin, K. M., Craig, K. D., & Greenstein, H. (1986). Social influences on factored dimensions of the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 30(4), 461–469.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hasegawa, M., Hattori, S., Mishima, M., Matsumoto, I., Kimura, T., Baba, Y., et al. (2001). The McGill Pain Questionnaire, Japanese version, reconsidered: Confirming the theoretical structure. Pain Research and Management, 6(4), 173–180.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lowe, N. K., Walker, S. N., & MacCallum, R. C. (1991). Confirming the theoretical structure of the McGill Pain Questionnaire in acute clinical pain. Pain, 46(1), 53–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Masedo, A. I., & Esteve, R. (2000). Some empirical evidence regarding the validity of the Spanish version of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ-SV). Pain, 85(3), 451–456.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Mystakidou, K., Parpa, E., Tsilika, E., Kalaidopoulou, O., Georgaki, S., Galanos, A., et al. (2002). Greek McGill Pain Questionnaire: Validation and utility in cancer patients. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 24(4), 379–387.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Reading, A. E. (1982). A comparison of the McGill Pain Questionnaire in chronic and acute pain. Pain, 13(2), 185–192.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wright, K. D., Asmundson, G. J., & McCreary, D. R. (2001). Factorial validity of the short-form McGill pain questionnaire (SF-MPQ). European Journal of Pain, 5(3), 279–284. doi:10.1053/eujp.2001.0243.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Griswold, G. A., & Clark, W. C. (2005). Item analysis of cancer patient responses to the multidimensional affect and pain survey demonstrates high inter-item consistency and discriminability and determines the content of a short form. Journal of Pain, 6(2), 67–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cella, D., Yount, S., Rothrock, N., Gershon, R., Cook, K., Reeve, B., et al. (2007). The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): Progress of an NIH roadmap cooperative group during its first two years. Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S3–S11. doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000258615.42478.55.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Cook, K. F., Crane, P. K., Teresi, J. A., et al. (2007). Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: Plans for the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S22–S31. doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000250483.85507.04.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Liu, H., Cella, D., Gershon, R., Shen, J., Morales, L. S., Riley, W., et al. (2010). Representativeness of the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system internet panel. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(11), 1169–1178. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.11.021.

    Google Scholar 

  24. DeWalt, D. A., Rothrock, N., Yount, S., & Stone, A. A. (2007). Evaluation of item candidates: The PROMIS qualitative item review. Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S12–S21. doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000254567.79743.e2.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis. Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. (2004). Mplus user’s guide (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Victor, T. W., Jensen, M. P., Gammaitoni, A. R., Gould, E. M., White, R. E., & Galer, B. S. (2008). The dimensions of pain quality: Factor analysis of the Pain Quality Assessment Scale. Clinical Journal of Pain, 24(6), 550–555. doi:10.1097/AJP.0b013e31816b1058.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Revicki, D. A., Chen, W. H., Harnam, N., Cook, K. F., Amtmann, D., Callahan, L. F., et al. (2009). Development and psychometric analysis of the PROMIS pain behavior item bank. Pain, 146(1–2), 158–169. doi:10.1016/j.pain.2009.07.029.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Amtmann, D., Cook, K. F., Jensen, M. P., Chen, W. H., Choi, S., Revicki, D., et al. (2010). Development of a PROMIS item bank to measure pain interference. Pain, 150(1), 173–182. doi:10.1016/j.pain.2010.04.025.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Dworkin, R. H., Corbin, A. E., Young, J. P, Jr., Sharma, U., LaMoreaux, L., Bockbrader, H., et al. (2003). Pregabalin for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Neurology, 60(8), 1274–1283.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Rowbotham, M., Harden, N., Stacey, B., Bernstein, P., & Magnus-Miller, L. (1998). Gabapentin for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280(21), 1837–1842.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is a National Institutes of Health (NIH) Roadmap initiative to develop a computerized system measuring patient-reported outcomes in respondents with a wide range of chronic diseases and demographic characteristics. NIH Science Officers on this project are Susan Czajkowski, PhD, Lawrence Fine, MD, DrPH, Laura Lee Johnson, Ph.D. Louis Quatrano, PhD, Bryce Reeve, PhD, William Riley, PhD, Susana Serrate-Sztein, MD, and James Witter, MD, PhD. This manuscript was reviewed by the PROMIS Publications Subcommittee prior to external peer review. See the web site at www.nihpromis.org for additional information on the PROMIS cooperative group.

Conflict of interest

PROMIS was funded by cooperative agreements to a Statistical Coordinating Center (NorthShore University Health System, PI: David Cella, PhD, U01AR52177) and six Primary Research Sites (Duke University, PI: Kevin Weinfurt, PhD, U01AR52186; University of North Carolina, PI: Darren DeWalt, MD, MPH, U01AR52181; University of Pittsburgh, PI: Paul A. Pilkonis, PhD, U01AR52155; Stanford University, PI: James Fries, MD, U01AR52158; Stony Brook University, PI: Arthur Stone, PhD, U01AR52170; and University of Washington, PI: Dagmar Amtmann, PhD, U01AR52171). The authors report no conflicts of interest related to this research and manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Health Outcomes Research, United BioSource Corporation, 7101 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 600, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA

    Dennis A. Revicki, Neesha Harnam & Wen-Hung Chen

  2. Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA

    Karon F. Cook

  3. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Dagmar Amtmann

  4. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA

    Francis J. Keefe

Authors
  1. Dennis A. Revicki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karon F. Cook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dagmar Amtmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Neesha Harnam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wen-Hung Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Francis J. Keefe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dennis A. Revicki.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 4 and 5.

Table 4 EFA pain quality—rotated factor pattern from exploratory factor analysis
Full size table
Table 5 EFA pain quality—rotated factor pattern from exploratory factor analysis
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Revicki, D.A., Cook, K.F., Amtmann, D. et al. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the PROMIS pain quality item bank. Qual Life Res 23, 245–255 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0467-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0467-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation