Development and validation of the Collaborative Health Outcomes Information Registry body map

• Main Authors: Kristen Hymel Scherrer, Maisa S. Ziadni, Jiang-Ti Kong, John A. Sturgeon, Vafi Salmasi, Juliette Hong, Eric Cramer, Abby L. Chen, Teresa Pacht, Garrick Olson, Beth D. Darnall, Ming-Chih Kao, Sean Mackey
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Wolters Kluwer 2021-01-01
• Series: PAIN Reports
• Online Access: http://journals.lww.com/painrpts/fulltext/10.1097/PR9.0000000000000880

Abstract. Introduction:. Critical for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic pain is the anatomical distribution of pain. Several body maps allow patients to indicate pain areas on paper; however, each has its limitations. Objectives:. To provide a comprehensive body map that can be universally applied across pain conditions, we developed the electronic Collaborative Health Outcomes Information Registry (CHOIR) self-report body map by performing an environmental scan and assessing existing body maps. Methods:. After initial validation using a Delphi technique, we compared (1) pain location questionnaire responses of 530 participants with chronic pain with (2) their pain endorsements on the CHOIR body map (CBM) graphic. A subset of participants (n = 278) repeated the survey 1 week later to assess test–retest reliability. Finally, we interviewed a patient cohort from a tertiary pain management clinic (n = 28) to identify reasons for endorsement discordances. Results:. The intraclass correlation coefficient between the total number of body areas endorsed on the survey and those from the body map was 0.86 and improved to 0.93 at follow-up. The intraclass correlation coefficient of the 2 body map graphics separated by 1 week was 0.93. Further examination demonstrated high consistency between the questionnaire and CBM graphic (<10% discordance) in most body areas except for the back and shoulders (≈15–19% discordance). Participants attributed inconsistencies to misinterpretation of body regions and laterality, the latter of which was addressed by modifying the instructions. Conclusions:. Our data suggest that the CBM is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing the distribution of pain.