Bristol Rabbit Pain Scale (BRPS): clinical utility, validity and reliability
- PMID: 36085033
- PMCID: PMC9461217
- DOI: 10.1186/s12917-022-03434-x
Bristol Rabbit Pain Scale (BRPS): clinical utility, validity and reliability
Abstract
Background: The Bristol Rabbit Pain Scale (BRPS) was developed using a combination of methods, focus groups and behavioural observation, that led to a composite pain scale of six categories (Demeanour, Locomotion, Posture, Ears, Eyes and Grooming) with four intensities of pain (0, 1, 2, and 3), and a total score of 0-18. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical utility, validity and reliability of the BRPS.
Materials and methods: The clinical utility of the BRPS was tested using a questionnaire composed of ten questions each on a five-point Likert scale ranging from one (strongly disagree) to five (strongly agree). The respondents, (veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses), were asked to assess up to four rabbits in acute pain, using the novel pain. They then completed the questionnaire which asked whether the BRPS was easy and quick to use and whether it provided information that was clinically useful. The questionnaire was tested for internal reliability using the Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient. The construct validity (how well the tool measures the concept it was designed for) was measured by observers blindly rating 20 rabbits pre- and post-surgery whilst the criterion validity (the degree to which the tool correlates with a gold standard) was assessed by correlating BRPS scores with scores using a numerical rating scale (NRS) with a total score of 0-10. Inter-rater reliability was tested by quantifying the agreement in the pain scores given by nine participants when assessing the same 40 video clips. The intra-rater reliability was measured by testing how consistent the participants were when rating the same clips one month later.
Results: The median score of the ten questions of the clinical utility test was 4 (range 2-5). The Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient of the clinical utility test was good (α = 0.811) demonstrating good internal consistency. The median (range) pain score of the BRPS and the NRS were 3 (0-14) and 0 (0-8) before surgery and 12 (1-18) and 7 (0-10) after surgery respectively. The BRPS demonstrated high construct validity (Z = -11.452; p < 0.001) and there was a strong correlation between the BRPS and the NRS (Rho = 0.851; p < 0.001) indicating high criterion validity. The inter-rater and the intra-rater agreements were α = 0.863 and α = 0.861 respectively, which is considered good.
Conclusions: This study showed that the BRPS is a suitable tool for quantifying pain in rabbits in a clinically useful, valid and reliable way.
Keywords: Clincal utility; Pain; Pain scale; Rabbit; Reliability; Validity.
© 2022. The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Development of the Bristol Rabbit Pain Scale (BRPS): A multidimensional composite pain scale specific to rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus).PLoS One. 2021 Jun 11;16(6):e0252417. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252417. eCollection 2021. PLoS One. 2021. PMID: 34115781 Free PMC article.
-
Reliability and construct validity of a composite pain scale for rabbit (CANCRS) in a clinical environment.PLoS One. 2020 Apr 30;15(4):e0221377. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221377. eCollection 2020. PLoS One. 2020. PMID: 32352960 Free PMC article.
-
Determining a cut-off point for intervention analgesia in rabbits using the Bristol Rabbit Pain Scale.Vet Rec. 2023 Sep 9;193(5):e2995. doi: 10.1002/vetr.2995. Epub 2023 May 25. Vet Rec. 2023. PMID: 37227266
-
Shared decision making: developing the OPTION scale for measuring patient involvement.Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Apr;12(2):93-9. doi: 10.1136/qhc.12.2.93. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003. PMID: 12679504 Free PMC article. Review.
-
[Psychometric characteristics of questionnaires designed to assess the knowledge, perceptions and practices of health care professionals with regards to alcoholic patients].Encephale. 2004 Sep-Oct;30(5):437-46. doi: 10.1016/s0013-7006(04)95458-9. Encephale. 2004. PMID: 15627048 Review. French.
Cited by
-
Prosthetic Joint Infection Research Models in NZW Rabbits: Opportunities for Standardization-A Systematic Review.J Funct Biomater. 2024 Oct 15;15(10):307. doi: 10.3390/jfb15100307. J Funct Biomater. 2024. PMID: 39452605 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparison between Carprofen and Meloxicam for Post-Neutering Pain Management in Pet Rabbits.Vet Sci. 2024 Jun 5;11(6):257. doi: 10.3390/vetsci11060257. Vet Sci. 2024. PMID: 38922004 Free PMC article.
-
The impact of stress and anesthesia on animal models of infectious disease.Front Vet Sci. 2023 Feb 2;10:1086003. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2023.1086003. eCollection 2023. Front Vet Sci. 2023. PMID: 36816193 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Evaluating the Efficacy of a Peripheral Nerve Simulator-Guided Brachial Plexus Block in Rabbits Undergoing Orthopaedic Surgery Compared to Systemic Analgesia.Vet Sci. 2024 May 13;11(5):213. doi: 10.3390/vetsci11050213. Vet Sci. 2024. PMID: 38787185 Free PMC article.
-
Deep learning for video-based automated pain recognition in rabbits.Sci Rep. 2023 Sep 6;13(1):14679. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-41774-2. Sci Rep. 2023. PMID: 37674052 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Stasiak KL, Maul D, French E, Hellyer PW, Vandewoude S. Species-specific assessment of pain in laboratory animals. Contemp Top Lab Anim Sci. 2003;42(4):13–20. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources