Validity of four pain intensity rating scales

The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Verbal Rating Scale (VRS), and the Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) are among the most commonly used measures of pain intensity in clinical and research settings. Although evidence supports their validity as measures of pain intensity, few studies have compared them with respect to the critical validity criteria of responsivity, and no experiment has directly compared all 4 measures in the same study. The current study compared the relative validity of VAS, NRS, VRS, and FPS-R for detecting differences in painful stimulus intensity and differences between men and women in response to experimentally induced pain. One hundred twenty-seven subjects underwent four 20-second cold pressor trials with temperature order counterbalanced across 1°C, 3°C, 5°C, and 7°C and rated pain intensity using all 4 scales. Results showed statistically significant differences in pain intensity between temperatures for each scale, with lower temperatures resulting in higher pain intensity. The order of responsivity was as follows: NRS, VAS, VRS, and FPS-R. However, there were relatively small differences in the responsivity between scales. A statistically significant sex main effect was also found for the NRS, VRS, and FPS-R. The findings are consistent with previous studies supporting the validity of each scale. The most support emerged for the NRS as being both (1) most responsive and (2) able to detect sex differences in pain intensity. The results also provide support for the validity of the scales for use in Portuguese samples.     

Schmerzerfassung

The aim of this study was to evaluate a new modified visual analog scale, called the dolorimeter, together with a verbal rating scale (VRS) and a linear visual scale (VAS), in the measurement of acute postoperative pain. The scales were evaluated with reference to their sensitivity, reliability and validity, and correlation. During the study 200 patients 11-70 years of age (125 men, 75 women) were interviewed after orthopedic surgery to ascertain the intensity of the pain. We had the patients judge the intensity of pain before and 1 h after giving analgesics by using the dolorimeter, VRS, and VAS. At the end of the examination, we asked the patients whether the pain had decreased or not which method they preferred, and why they preferred this method. The results of this interrogation proved that the sensitivity of the VRS is low; its parameters overlap greatly on the analog, scale, and it is therefore too rough to be a sufficient measurement of pain. On the other hand, the high sensitivity of the two analog scales which patients can use to determine their individual pain intensity proved to be much more sensitive. All three methods correlated statistically; the highest correlation coefficients were found between the analog scales VAS and the dolorimeter. Because the dolorimeter is clearly preferred to the other methods, especially by elderly patients, we came to the conclusion that the dolorimeter is less abstract than the VAS and more practical to handle.     

Reliability and validity of the Faces Pain Scale with older adults

BACKGROUND: The Faces Pain Scale (FPS) is effective with older adults in clinical assessment of pain intensity. The 0-10 numerical rating scale (NRS) has universally adapted for assessment of pain intensity. The commonly used versions of the FPS have six, seven or nine faces. OBJECTIVES: We proposed an 11 face modified version of the McGrath nine face FPS to compare with the 0-10 NRS without the mathematical translation. The psychometric properties of the proposed version were also investigated in a sample of Korean older adults. DESIGN: This study employed methodological research design. SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: A sample of 31 older adults was recruited through local senior citizen centers to examine the construct validity and the test-retest reliability. For the concurrent validity testing, a sample of 85 older adults with chronic pain was recruited through a general hospital and an oriental medical hospital. METHODS: The construct validity was examined by determining if the subjects perceive the FPS as representing pain and they agree on the rank of each face. The test-retest reliability was examined at a 2-week interval. The concurrent validity was examined by using the NRS and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). RESULTS: Subjects perceived the 11 FPS as a pain measure, and the subjects' agreements in the rank ordering of the faces were almost perfect (Kendall's W = .93, p < .001). Cohen's kappa of .61 (p < .001) for test-retest reliability was acceptable in the cognitively intact subjects. Concurrent validity measured by the correlation between the FPS and the NRS (r = .73, p < .001) and the VAS (r = .73, p < .001) was supported. CONCLUSIONS: These results supported the appropriateness of the 11 FPS for use with the older adults in clinical practice to measure pain intensity. Additionally, this study provided cross-cultural evidence to evaluate usefulness of the FPS.     

老年人疼痛强度评估量表的选择

目的:调查老年人使用4种常用疼痛强度评估量表的情况,为选择合适的老年疼痛评估工具提供依据.方法:广州市两家老人院的61例65岁以上老年人参加了研究.用随机顺序排列的直观模拟量表(VAS)、数字评定量表(NRS)、词语描述量表(VDS)和修订版面部表情疼痛量表(FPS-R),对老年人的回忆性疼痛进行评估.结果:受试对象中男性17例,女性44例,平均年龄81.7岁,54例(88.5%) 认知正常,7例(11.5%)有一定程度的认知受损.4种量表疼痛评分间的Spearman相关系数为0.84～0.94.老年人能够用至少一种量表来主诉疼痛强度.FPS-R是错误率最低而首选率最高的量表.结论:4种量表均可用于评估老年人的疼痛,但FPS-R是最佳量表.将FPS-R、VDS和NRS 3种量表合并,制成简易疼痛评估尺,适合老年人认知功能且实用的疼痛评估方法.     

Reliability of rating low back pain with a visual analogue scale and a semantic differential scale

Pain rating scales, such as the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) are important tools for assessing patients’ symptom status. For a non-English speaking patient, VRS could pose a problem as a result of language barrier. The objective of this study was to determine the intra-class and inter-class correlations of VAS and a Semantic Differential Scale (SDS) in patients with low back pain. 25 patients with chronic low back pain were purposively selected for the study. Two testers (1 and 2) independently rated the pain experienced by the patients when asked to bend forward and hold on when pain was either exacerbated or aggravated. Finger-to-floor distance (FFD) was taken, as a measure of flexion of the spine, for each patient. Pain was rated using VAS and SDS. Our results showed strong intra-tester correlations between VAS and SDS of each tester (p < .05), and strong inter-tester correlations for VAS and for SDS (p < .05). The result of using two-way ANOVA showed that there was no significant difference in pain ratings with VAS by tester-1, VAS by tester-2, SDS by tester-1, and SDS by tester-2. F-ratio was not significant (p > .05). There was no significant difference between FFDs by the two testers (p > .05). Our results suggest that the two scales are reliable and valid for clinical rating of low back pain. Further studies with larger samples and using other movements of the spine are suggested.     

A descriptive study of the use of visual analogue scales and verbal rating scales for the assessment of postoperative pain in orthopedic patients

Visual analogue scales (VAS) and verbal rating scales (VRS) are widely used to assess pain. This paper presents a secondary analysis of a subsection of data collected as part of an evaluation of an intervention to improve nighttime pain. The aims were to describe the relationship between the VAS and VRS; to compare characteristics of the noncompliant groups in terms of age, gender, type of surgery, and analgesics; to explore the reasons for noncompletion of the VAS or VRS; and to determine the noncompliance rates with each assessment scale. Worst and average pain scores were obtained for the second postoperative night for 417 patients. Fifty-nine patients (14.2%) did not complete the VAS. In contrast, two patients did not complete the VRS (0.5%). The scores generated from the VAS and VRS correlated well, although the range of VAS scores corresponding to each VRS category was wide. We conclude that the VRS was more suitable for use in this clinical setting.     

Examining the validity,reliability, and preference of three pediatric pain measurement tools in African-American children

PURPOSE: To compare the validity, reliability, and preference of pain intensity measurement tools--the African-American Oucher Scale, the Wong-Baker FACES Scale, and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS)--in 100 African-American children between 3 and 18 years of age. METHODS: During a visit to the sickle cell anemia clinic, the children were asked to describe two painful procedures/treatments they had experienced and to choose which one hurt the most. They rated the pain intensity of each procedure/treatment on the three scales that were presented in a preselected order. After using all the scales, the children then chose their favorite scale. The same procedure was repeated at the end of the visit, with a minimum of 15 minutes between the test and retest. RESULTS: Concurrent validity was determined by comparing the rank order of the two identified painful items with the pain scores on the three scales. Chi square analysis indicated a statistically significant difference among the scales for preference (chi2 = 24.08, df = 2, p < 0.0001) and reliability (chi2 = 6.12, df = 2, p < 0.05), but not validity (chi2 = 0.81, df = 2, NS) for the entire sample. Most children preferred using the FACES Scale (56%) versus the Oucher (26%) and VAS (18%). When the data were analyzed for three cognitive stages (ages 3-7, 8-12, and 13-18 years), the following were found: For the school-age period, chi square for reliability did not reach significance (chi2 = 4.35, df = 2, NS); for the preschool-age period, chi square for validity did reach significance (chi2 = 6.49, df = 2, p < 0.05) and was strongest for the FACES scale, followed by the Oucher. CONCLUSIONS: The study findings indicated that the FACES and African-American Oucher Scales are valid and reliable tools for measuring pain in children. Among the entire sample and each age group, the FACES scale was the most preferred scale.     

肌内效贴对脑卒中患者肩关节半脱位后肩痛的疗效观察

目的:观察肌内效贴对脑卒中患者偏瘫侧肩关节半脱位后肩痛的疗效。方法:56例脑卒中肩关节半脱位后肩痛患者,按照随机数字表法分为治疗组与对照组(各28例),两组患者均实施常规康复治疗及宣教,治疗组在此基础上结合肌内效贴干预。分别于治疗前和治疗6周后通过X线测量法测量肩峰与肱骨头间距(AHI)、肩关节视觉模拟评分(VAS)疼痛、Fugl-Meyer上肢功能评分、肩痛侧腋神经及肌皮神经的运动神经传导测定,对两组治疗结果进行疗效评价。结果:治疗前,两组患者AHI值、VAS评分、Fugl-Meyer上肢功能评分无明显差异(P0.05),且检测所有患者肩痛侧腋神经(刺激部位:Erb点;记录部位:三角肌)及肌皮神经(刺激部位:Erb点;记录部位:肱二头肌)后发现两组中某些患者肌皮神经(30例,53.57%)、腋神经(31例,55.36%)波幅明显低于正常值,而潜伏期轻度延长或正常(提示轴索损伤)。两组治疗6周后,治疗组各项评分改善优于对照组(P0.05)且无不良事件发生。结论:在常规康复治疗的基础上,肌内效贴在脑卒中患者偏瘫侧肩关节半脱位后肩痛早期防治中,具有良好的疗效,其相应机制有待进一步研究。     

The psychometric properties of an Arabic numeric pain rating scale for measuring osteoarthritis knee pain

Purpose: The aims of this study were to translate the numeric rating scale (NRS) into Arabic and to evaluate the test–retest reliability and convergent validity of an Arabic Numeric Pain Rating Scale (ANPRS) for measuring pain in osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee.

Methods: The English version of the NRS was translated into Arabic as per the translation process guidelines for patient-rated outcome scales. One hundred twenty-one consecutive patients with OA of the knee who had experienced pain for more than 6 months were asked to report their pain levels on the ANPRS, visual analogue scale (VAS), and verbal rating scale (VRS). A second assessment was performed 48 h after the first to assess test–retest reliability. The test–retest reliability was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC_2,1). The convergent validity was assessed using Spearman rank correlation coefficient. In addition, the minimum detectable change (MDC) and standard error of measurement (SEM) were also assessed.

Results: The repeatability of ANPRS was good to excellent (ICC 0.89). The SEM and MDC were 0.71 and 1.96, respectively. Significant correlations were found with the VAS and VRS scores (p?<0.01).

Conclusions: The Arabic numeric pain rating scale is a valid and reliable scale for measuring pain levels in OA of the knee.

• Implications for Rehabilitation

• The Arabic Numeric Pain Rating Scale (ANPRS) is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring pain in osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee, with psychometric properties in agreement with other widely used scales.

• The ANPRS is well correlated with the VAS and NRS scores in patients with OA of the knee.

• The ANPRS appears to measure pain intensity similar to the VAS, NRS, and VRS and may provide additional advantages to Arab populations, as Arabic numbers are easily understood by this population.

     

Validating the Functional Pain Scale for Hospitalized Adults

BackgroundEnhancing pain patient's ability to function and cope is important, but assessing only intensity ignores those aspects of pain. The Functional Pain Scale (FPS), addresses these dimensions but lacked validation in hospitalized adults with chronic pain.AimsThis research was conducted to establish the FPS psychometric properties in hospitalized adults.DesignA prospective pilot study examined the reliability and validity of the FPS in two acute care hospitals.SettingsAdult inpatients from medical/surgical units at two hospitals.Participants/SubjectsA convenience sample of 93 subjects from an Academic Medical Center and 51 from a tertiary care hospital who were 21-81 years old and primarily Caucasian.MethodsHospitalized adults with chronic pain at two facilities provided pain scores from the FPS, Numeric Rating Scale, Pain, Enjoyment of Life, and General Activities Scale, and Quality of Pain Care Scale. Test-retest reliability and construct validity were evaluated using standard correlation methods.ResultsHospitalized adults aged 21-88 years with chronic pain (N = 144) were evaluated. Data supported test-retest reliability of the FPS (r = .84; p < .001), which had strong, statistically significant correlations with the Numeric Rating Scale at different study sites (r = 0.75 and r = 0.45, respectively), indicating acceptable construct validity. Significant weak correlations between the FPS and other measures of mood and functioning failed to support discriminant validity.ConclusionsAlthough statistically significant, the reliability and validity of FPS were not as strong in hospitalized chronic pain patients as reported for older adults in other settings.     

经皮神经电刺激结合运动疗法治疗脑卒中后肩痛的疗效观察

目的观察经皮神经电刺激（TENS）结合运动疗法治疗脑卒中后肩痛的疗效。方法将60例脑卒中后肩痛患者分为2组，治疗组30例，采用TENS合并运动疗法治疗；对照组30例，采用单纯TENS治疗。采用疼痛的视觉模拟评分法（VAS）和Fugl-Meyer评估量表进行疗效评定。结果治疗组在减轻疼痛、增加肩关节活动范围、增加患侧上肢运动功能方面明显优于对照组（P〈0．01）。结论TENS合并运动疗法治疗脑卒中后肩痛具有满意疗效。     

音乐治疗对脑卒中肩痛伴有情绪障碍患者临床疗效的观察

目的:观察音乐治疗对脑卒中后肩痛伴情绪障碍患者的治疗效果,为探究脑卒中后肩痛伴情绪障碍患者的康复干预提供参考。方法:选择肩痛伴情绪障碍的脑卒中患者92例,随机分为常规组和观察组各46例。92例患者均给予常规药物治疗和康复治疗,观察组根据个体化原则联合音乐干预。干预前后对所有患者进行疼痛目测类比法(VAS),上肢Fugl-Meyer运动功能评定量表(FMA),汉密顿焦虑量表(HAMA),汉密顿抑郁量表(HAMD)评定。结果:治疗4周后,2组VAS、HAMA、HAMD评分均较治疗前明显降低(均P 0. 05),观察组更低于常规组(P0. 05); 2组FMA评分均较治疗前明显提高(均P 0. 05),观察组更高于常规组(P 0. 05)。结论:音乐治疗不仅可明显减轻脑卒中后肩痛,还可提高患者的运动功能和改善患者的情绪。     

穴位点按联合虚拟情景训练在脑卒中患者肩关节半脱位伴疼痛的应用研究

目的:探讨穴位点按联合虚拟情景训练在脑卒中后肩关节半脱位伴疼痛中的临床应用。方法:将60例脑卒中肩关节半脱位伴疼痛患者,按照随机方式分成2组:对照组30例给予穴位点按(点按肩贞、肩井、肩髃等穴位)疗法联合常规康复治疗,治疗组30例在对照组基础上增加虚拟情景训练,治疗周期为4周,2组患者于治疗前和治疗后均进行肩峰与肱骨头X线测量间距(AHI)、目测类比量表法(VAS)、上肢运动功能量表(FMA)评估。结果:治疗4周后,2组患者AHI、VAS均低于治疗前(P<0.05),FMA高于治疗前(P<0.05)。治疗后,治疗组AHI、VAS评分低于对照组(P<0.05),FMA评分高于对照组(P<0.05)。结论:治疗组的穴位点按联合虚拟情景训练可以缓解脑卒中后肩关节半脱位伴疼痛的症状和半脱位上肢的运动功能,值得临床推广。     

The Faces Pain Scale-Revised: toward a common metric in pediatric pain measurement.

The Faces Pain Scale (FPS; Bieri et al., Pain 41 (1990) 139) is a self-report measure used to assess the intensity of children's pain. Three studies were carried out to revise the original scale and validate the adapted version. In the first phase, the FPS was revised from its original seven faces to six, while maintaining its desirable psychometric properties, in order to make it compatible in scoring with other self-rating and observational scales which use a common metric (0-5 or 0-10). Using a computer-animated version of the FPS developed by Champion and colleagues (Sydney Animated Facial Expressions Scale), psychophysical methods were applied to identify four faces representing equal intervals between the scale values representing least pain and most pain. In the second phase, children used the new six-face Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) to rate the intensity of pain from ear piercing. Its validity is supported by a strong positive correlation (r=0.93, N=76) with a visual analogue scale (VAS) measure in children aged 5-12 years. In the third phase, a clinical sample of pediatric inpatients aged 4-12 years used the FPS-R and a VAS or the colored analogue scale (CAS) to rate pain during hospitalization for surgical and non-surgical painful conditions. The validity of the FPS-R was further supported by strong positive correlations with the VAS (r=0.92, N=45) and the CAS (r=0.84, N=45) in this clinical sample. Most children in all age groups including the youngest were able to use the FPS-R in a manner that was consistent with the other measures. There were no significant differences between the means on the FPS-R and either of the analogue scales. The FPS-R is shown to be appropriate for use in assessment of the intensity of children's acute pain from age 4 or 5 onward. It has the advantage of being suitable for use with the most widely used metric for scoring (0-10), and conforms closely to a linear interval scale.