Background <p>Pain in patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD)is often underdiagnosed and, therefore, undertreated. The King’s Parkinson’s Pain Scale (KPPS) is one of the few validated tools specifically designed to assess pain in patients with Parkinson’s disease but lacks a Dutch version. This study aims to validate the KPPS for patients in the Netherlands and to examine which cognitive functions are related to the comprehension of the KPPS.</p> Methods <p>The KPPS was translated into Dutch and validated in 70 patients with PD through internal consistency, convergent and discriminant validity testing. Patients had been diagnosed with PD for an average of 5.65 years. Cognitive function was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA).</p> Results <p>The Dutch KPPS showed acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.69), though its factor structure differed from the original. Convergent validity was confirmed via significant correlations with the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), while discriminant validity was supported through correlations with the Non-Motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) and EQ-5D-3&#xa0;L. Verbal memory and abstract thinking showed a tendency toward significance in their association with pain scores.</p> Conclusion <p>The Dutch KPPS is a reliable and valid tool for assessing pain in Dutch patients with PD, though its structure differs from the original. These differences may reflect variability in pain perception or classification, highlighting the need for further research integrating the PD-PCS framework to refine pain assessment in PD.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Validation of the Dutch version of the King’s Parkinson’s disease pain scale

  • Nour Alkaduhimi,
  • Yvonne Kerst,
  • Annemarie Vlaar,
  • Henk Berendse,
  • Henry Weinstein,
  • Erik Scherder

摘要

Background

Pain in patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD)is often underdiagnosed and, therefore, undertreated. The King’s Parkinson’s Pain Scale (KPPS) is one of the few validated tools specifically designed to assess pain in patients with Parkinson’s disease but lacks a Dutch version. This study aims to validate the KPPS for patients in the Netherlands and to examine which cognitive functions are related to the comprehension of the KPPS.

Methods

The KPPS was translated into Dutch and validated in 70 patients with PD through internal consistency, convergent and discriminant validity testing. Patients had been diagnosed with PD for an average of 5.65 years. Cognitive function was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA).

Results

The Dutch KPPS showed acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.69), though its factor structure differed from the original. Convergent validity was confirmed via significant correlations with the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), while discriminant validity was supported through correlations with the Non-Motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) and EQ-5D-3 L. Verbal memory and abstract thinking showed a tendency toward significance in their association with pain scores.

Conclusion

The Dutch KPPS is a reliable and valid tool for assessing pain in Dutch patients with PD, though its structure differs from the original. These differences may reflect variability in pain perception or classification, highlighting the need for further research integrating the PD-PCS framework to refine pain assessment in PD.