The psychometric strength & patient centeredness of the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale

Abstract: To address the erroneous claims made by Costantino and colleagues regarding the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale (DVPRS) as an inadequate patient-reported outcome measure for pain assessment in the military population. The impetus for designing the DVPRS was based on numerous interviews with clinicians and researchers, and the scale was developed by and with service members and their health providers before being thoroughly tested in military care settings. Service members were actively involved in the development of the DVPRS, and the psychometric properties were rigorously evaluated in several cohorts of service members. Purposive sampling was used to obtain representative samples of focus group informants including service members, Veterans, and clinicians during the scale’s development. The DVPRS has acceptable internal consistency reliability, content validity, convergent validity, and construct validity. The claims made by Costantino and colleagues regarding the inadequacy of the DVPRS lack rigor and overlook previous research engaging service members in focus groups and testing to inform the instrument’s design. The widespread utilization of the DVPRS in research and clinical practice across military, Veteran, and civilian care settings indicates the psychometric strength and relevance to patients is recognized by clinicians and researchers alike. While the evolution of outcomes assessment instruments is expected, the DVPRS remains a valuable tool for pain assessment in the military population.

Read the full article
Report a problem with this article

Related articles

  • More for Researchers

    Reintegration and decent work among United States Veterans: Impact of marginalization, social support, and career adaptability

    Abstract:United States military veterans face challenges when reintegrating into civilian society. Among these difficulties often exist barriers for veterans in navigating work and career experiences. This study tested factors that may contribute to experiences of decent work and reintegration in a sample of 90 United States veterans. Utilizing the Psychology of Working Theory as a framework, veterans' social support was hypothesized to be a moderating factor in the relationship between veterans' experiences of marginalization and decent work. Additionally, decent work was examined as a potential mediator in the association between veterans' career adaptability and reintegration. Separate moderation and mediation models were tested to examine the study's hypotheses. Results did not find social support to moderate the relationship between marginalization and decent work. However, decent work significantly and partially mediated the relationship between career adaptability and reintegration. Interpretation of these findings in the context of the literature is discussed, as well as implications for practice and theory, limitations, and future directions.