has evidence of usability, content validity, construct validity, clinical feasibility, and patient preference in children (aged 12-18 years) and adults with different types of chronic pain and arthritis.

Peer-Reviewed Publications

1. McMahon E, Wilson-Pauwels L, Henry JL, Jenkinson J, Sutherland B, Brierley M. The Iconic Pain Assessment Tool: Facilitating the Translation of Pain Sensations and Improving Patient-Physician Dialogue. J Bio Communication. 2008 Aug 27;34(2):E20–4. View

Key Findings: Using visual pain icons and an intuitive online interface, patients can record multiple dimensions of their pain, including its quality (what it feels like), intensity (how much it hurts), location on the body, and changes throughout the day

2. Lalloo C, Henry JL. Evaluation of the Iconic Pain Assessment Tool by a heterogeneous group of people in pain. Pain Research & Management. 2011 Jan;16(1):13–8. View

Key Findings: Adults with chronic pain perceive PainQuILT™ as a valuable tool for communicating their pain.

3. Lalloo C, Stinson JN, Hochman JR, Adachi JD, Henry JL. Adapting the Iconic Pain Assessment Tool Version 2 (IPAT2) for Adults and Adolescents With Arthritis Pain Through Usability Testing and Refinement of Pain Quality Icons. The Clinical Journal of Pain. 2013 Mar;29(3):253–64. View

Key Findings: The pain quality icons have evidence of content validity, meaning that they are representative of the pain experience. PainQuILT™ was rated as easy to use and valuable by adolescents and adults with arthritis pain.

4. Lalloo C, Stinson JN, Brown SC, Campbell F, Isaac L, Henry JL. Pain-QuILT: Assessing Clinical Feasibility of a Web-based Tool for the Visual Self-Report of Pain in an Interdisciplinary Pediatric Chronic Pain Clinic. The Clinical Journal of Pain. 2014 Nov;30(11):934–43. View

Key Findings: PainQuILT™ has evidence of clinical feasibility in the setting of a tertiary care pediatric interdisciplinary chronic pain clinic. It was preferred by a majority of adolescents for reporting their pain, compared to a verbal interview method. The interdisciplinary pain team characterized PainQuILT™ as valuable for  capturing detailed information about pain in a quick snapshot. PainQuILT™ scores have evidence of convergent construct validity, compared with a 0-10 numerical rating scale.

5. Lalloo C, Kumbhare D, Stinson JN, Henry JL. Pain-QuILT: Clinical Feasibility of a Web-Based Visual Pain Assessment Tool in Adults With Chronic Pain. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2014;16(5):e127. View

Key Findings: PainQuILT™ has evidence of clinical feasibility in the setting of an adult out-patient pain management and rehabilitation clinic. It was preferred by a majority of patients over the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ; Melzack, 1975) and Brief Pain Inventory (BPI; Cleeland, 1991). PainQuILT™ scores have evidence of convergent construct validity, in comparison with MPQ and BPI.

Patient Preference
From Lalloo et al. JMIR 2014. 16(5):e127.

*PainQuILT™ was previously called The Iconic Pain Assessment Tool