Reliability of the Non-Communicating Adult Pain Checklist (NCAPC), assessed by different groups of health workers.
The NCAPC gives reliable pain data when caregivers and therapists watch the same non-verbal adult with IDD.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team asked caregivers and therapists to watch the same non-verbal adults with IDD.
Each rater used the NCAPC, a 13-item pain checklist.
They scored the adults twice to see if the tool gave the same pain picture each time.
What they found
The checklist held steady.
Raters agreed with themselves 94% of the time and with each other 91–92% of the time.
High numbers mean the NCAPC is ready for everyday pain checks.
How this fits with other research
Lecavalier et al. (2006) reviewed tools for kids who cannot speak.
Their list included many pain cues, but they did not test the NCAPC because it came later.
The NCAPC now fills the adult gap their review left open.
Symons et al. (2005) also trained staff to code what they saw.
They got 70–100% agreement on approach and happiness cues.
The NCAPC matches that tight reliability, but for pain instead of preference.
Why it matters
You now have a short, free checklist you can trust.
Hand it to day-staff, nurses, or parents and teach them the 13 items.
When everyone scores the same, you can spot pain early and adjust care fast.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Print the NCAPC, train two staff for 10 minutes, and have them rate the same client after lunch to check your team’s agreement.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Evaluating pain in adults with intellectual and developmental disability (IDD) is a challenge. The Non-Communicating Adults Pain Checklist (NCAPC) was recently developed from the Non-Communicating Children's Pain Checklist (NCCPC) and examined in a group of adults with IDD (N=228) and found to hold satisfactory construct validity, internal consistency and sensitivity to pain. To further explore its basis for clinical use, intra and interrater reliability of the NCAPC was investigated. Data collection was done by videotaping the participants before and during influenza vaccination. Intrarater reliability was evaluated by the first author on a group of 50 randomly selected individuals (mean age 42.5, range 19-72) and was found at 0.94. Interrater reliability was investigated in two stages. In the initial step different groups of health care workers (caregivers, nurses, case managers, and therapists), each including five raters, viewed a sample of 12 adult participants with IDD (3 at each level of IDD mean age was 49 years, range 16-72), that were extracted from the population sample. Interrater reliability of all raters within the groups varied from low to very high (ICC(1,1)=0.40-0.88). Interrater reliability was very high in caregivers. The Physical -and Occupational therapists are one group were considered potential users of the measure. In the second stage 3 participants from each of the groups showing high interrater reliability (caregivers and therapist) evaluated interrater reliability in a randomly selected group of 40 individuals (mean age 41.2, range 15-72). Interrarter reliability for the therapists and caregivers was found at 0.91 and 0.92 correspondingly. The researchers conclude that that the NCAPC have been found to hold high reliability values.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2009 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2008.10.005