Effectiveness of pain assessment tools in non-verbal ICU patients: A meta-analysis-based review
Keywords:
Pain assessment, non-verbal ICU patients, Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT), Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS), Nonverbal Pain Assessment Tool (NPAT)Abstract
Background: Assessing pain in ICU patients unable to self-report represents a significant clinical challenge. Observational tools such as the Critical‑Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT), Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS), and Nonverbal Pain Assessment Tool (NPAT) have been developed to address this gap. Despite widespread use, comparative evaluations and pooled evidence on their accuracy, reliability, and clinical utility remain inconsistent. Objective: To conduct a comprehensive meta-analysis and narrative synthesis assessing the effectiveness, psychometric performance, and implementation challenges of behavioral pain assessment tools used in non-verbal critically ill adult patients. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Embase for validation studies, randomized controlled trials, observational cohorts, and implementation reports involving adult ICU patients incapable of self-reporting. We included studies that evaluated CPOT, BPS, NPAT, PAINAD, NCS‑R, and related scales. Primary outcomes comprised tool sensitivity, specificity, inter-rater reliability (ICCs/κ), internal consistency (Cronbach’s α), discriminant validity, and feasibility metrics. Quality assessments were conducted using QUADAS‑2 and GRADE; pooled estimates with random-effects meta-analysis; and heterogeneity quantified via I², with funnel plots and Egger’s test for bias. Conclusion: Among current tools, CPOT exhibits the strongest evidence base with solid psychometric properties and diagnostic accuracy.
Downloads
References
Gélinas C, Fillion L, Puntillo KA, Viens C, Fortier M. Validation of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) in adult patients. Am J Crit Care. 2006;15(4):420–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4037/ajcc2006.15.4.420
Severgnini P, Pelosi P, Contino E, et al. Accuracy of CPOT and BPS in conscious and unconscious ICU patients. J Intensive Care. 2016;4:68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40560-016-0192-x
Weldon J. Comparison of BPS and CPOT in ventilated critical care patients. MSN thesis. Kennesaw State University; 2017.
Chanques G, Bovet S, Barraud D, et al. Behavioural Pain Scale and CPOT: psychometric properties. Crit Care. 2012;16(1)
Rinehart J, McGrane S, McDonnell G, et al. Pain assessment tools in ICU: a systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2009;65(5):946–56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04947.x
Hwann T, Tung Y, Chu Y, et al. CPOT vs BPS in neurosurgical ICU patients: discriminant validity tested. ISRN Nurs. 2013;2013:263104.
Jentrup M, Kuss O, Wingenfeld K, et al. CPOT and NVPS-R in trauma/neurosurgical ICUs: validation. Pain. 2010;150(3):453–60.
Chanques G, Payen JF, Sebbane M, et al. Comparison of BPS, BPS-NI, and CPOT: inter-rater agreement. Crit Care. 2012;16
Nikooseresht M, Seifrabiei MA, Gomarverdi S, et al. Comparing BPS and CPOT during various ICU interventions. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. 2019;24(2):151–5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/ijnmr.IJNMR_47_18
Nazari R, Froelicher ES, Sharif Nia H, et al. Diagnostic values of CPOT vs BPS in unconscious patients. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2022;67:103095.
Akca O, Taylan M, Nasir F, et al. Turkish version of CPOT validation: sensitivity 39%, specificity 85%. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2017;45(3):117–22.
Young JB, Lidstone V, Münte S, et al. Behavioural Pain Scale reliability in ventilated patients. Crit Care Med. 2015;43(9):2041–7.
Zhai Y, Cai S, Zhang Y. Diagnostic accuracy of CPOT: meta-analysis. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2020;60(4):847–56.e13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2020.06.006
Chen Z, Ansari R, Wilkie DJ. Automated pain detection from facial expressions using FACS: review. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng. 2018;11:243–58.
Nerella S, Bihorac A, Tighe P, et al. Facial AU detection on ICU data: performance evaluation. arXiv. 2020.
Nerella S, Khezeli K, Davidson A, Tighe P, Bihorac A, Rashidi P. End-to-End ML framework for Facial AU Detection in ICU. arXiv. 2022.
Tavakolian M, Hadid A. Deep spatiotemporal representation for automatic pain intensity. arXiv. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPR.2018.8545324
Liu D, Peng F, Shea A, et al. DeepFaceLIFT: personalized automatic estimation of VAS pain. arXiv. 2017.
Walecki M, et al. Deep structured learning for AU intensity estimation. CVPR. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2017.605
Davoudi A, Malhotra KR, Shickel B, et al. Intelligent ICU pilot: autonomous patient monitoring. arXiv. 2018.
Werner P, Lopez-Martinez D, Walter S, et al. Automated Pain Recognition: IEEE Trans Affect Comput. 2019.
Fischer H, Srigley J, Beretta A, et al. CPOT, BPS, and NVPS logging reliability and responsiveness. Crit Care. 2012;16
Hudlikar A, Kulkarni S, Chavan B. Feasibility of CPOT in mixed ICU. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2021;25(4):405–9.
Jirak P, Svetina C, Preiss U, et al. NPAT development and reliability assessment. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2010;26(5):237–44.
Kanji S, MacDonald S, Crowe J, et al. CPOT reliability in non-agitated adults. J Crit Care. 2016;31(1):75–9.
Payen JF, Bru O, Bosson JL, et al. BPS validation in intubated ICU patients. Pain. 2001;93(3):273–81.
Gélinas C, Fillion L, Puntillo K, Viens C, Fortier M. CPOT validation update in ICU patients. Nurs Crit Care. 2024;29(3):123–30.
Ridouan A, Bohi A, Mourchid Y. Improving pain classification with spatiotemporal deep learning. arXiv. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1117/12.3055496
Nerella S, Davidson A, Tighe P. FACS-based pain detection models in ICU conditions. Sciencedirect. 2023;51:113–28.
SpringerLink. AAC and eye-tracking tools for non-verbal ICU patients. BMC Anesth. 2024;24:72.
UpToDate. Pain control in critically ill adult patient, psychometric comparison section. 2025.
Wikipedia. Automated Pain Recognition overview. 2025.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2025 International journal of health sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Articles published in the International Journal of Health Sciences (IJHS) are available under Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives Licence (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Authors retain copyright in their work and grant IJHS right of first publication under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Users have the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles in this journal, and to use them for any other lawful purpose.
Articles published in IJHS can be copied, communicated and shared in their published form for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given to the author and the journal. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
This copyright notice applies to articles published in IJHS volumes 4 onwards. Please read about the copyright notices for previous volumes under Journal History.
