Accuracy of retrospective pain measurement in patients with chronic pain.

Ingo Haase
{"title":"Accuracy of retrospective pain measurement in patients with chronic pain.","authors":"Ingo Haase","doi":"10.3892/mi.2023.95","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The use of pain scales that refer to a past time period is thereby based on the assumption that patients accurately remember their 'average', 'greatest' and 'least' pain. The present study addresses the validity of numerical pain rating scales that refer to a past period of time (herein, the past 7 days). Routine data from 94 patients with chronic pain were retrospectively analysed. Pain questionnaire data on the greatest, least and average pain during the past week and on current pain were compared with the mean value of entries in a pain diary from the corresponding period. The retrospectively assessed average, greatest and least pain values were consistently slightly higher than the corresponding values of daily current pain measured for the studied collective of chronic pain patients. Current pain (at the time of answering the questionnaire) better represents daily currently measured pain [intraclass correlation (ICC)=0.885] than retrospective individual measurements. The greatest correlation with averaged diary data was shown by the combination of questionnaire data on average, least and current pain (ICC=0.911). The high correlations between the questionnaire and diary data support the validity of retrospective pain surveys. However, the current status influences recall. Thus, composite retrospective pain data improve with the addition of current pain.</p>","PeriodicalId":74161,"journal":{"name":"Medicine international","volume":"3 4","pages":"35"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10336923/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine international","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3892/mi.2023.95","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The use of pain scales that refer to a past time period is thereby based on the assumption that patients accurately remember their 'average', 'greatest' and 'least' pain. The present study addresses the validity of numerical pain rating scales that refer to a past period of time (herein, the past 7 days). Routine data from 94 patients with chronic pain were retrospectively analysed. Pain questionnaire data on the greatest, least and average pain during the past week and on current pain were compared with the mean value of entries in a pain diary from the corresponding period. The retrospectively assessed average, greatest and least pain values were consistently slightly higher than the corresponding values of daily current pain measured for the studied collective of chronic pain patients. Current pain (at the time of answering the questionnaire) better represents daily currently measured pain [intraclass correlation (ICC)=0.885] than retrospective individual measurements. The greatest correlation with averaged diary data was shown by the combination of questionnaire data on average, least and current pain (ICC=0.911). The high correlations between the questionnaire and diary data support the validity of retrospective pain surveys. However, the current status influences recall. Thus, composite retrospective pain data improve with the addition of current pain.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
慢性疼痛患者回顾性疼痛测量的准确性。
因此,使用参照过去一段时间的疼痛量表是基于这样的假设,即患者准确地记住了他们的“平均”、“最大”和“最小”疼痛。本研究探讨了过去一段时间(这里指过去7天)的数值疼痛评定量表的有效性。回顾性分析94例慢性疼痛患者的常规资料。疼痛问卷中关于过去一周最大疼痛、最小疼痛和平均疼痛的数据以及当前疼痛的数据与相应时期疼痛日记条目的平均值进行比较。回顾性评估的平均、最大和最小疼痛值始终略高于所研究的慢性疼痛患者集体的每日当前疼痛测量值。当前疼痛(在回答问卷时)比回顾性个体测量更好地代表每日当前测量的疼痛[类内相关(ICC)=0.885]。平均疼痛、最小疼痛和当前疼痛的问卷数据的组合显示了与平均日记数据的最大相关性(ICC=0.911)。问卷和日记数据之间的高度相关性支持了回顾性疼痛调查的有效性。然而,当前状态影响回忆。因此,综合回顾性疼痛数据随着当前疼痛的增加而改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Acute presentation of short‑segment Hirschsprung's disease treated with Soave's procedure in a 20‑year‑old male: A case report and mini‑review of the literature. Screening for proline‑rich protein 11 gene expression in cervical cancer: Use as a novel diagnostic biomarker and poor prognostic factor. Examining the growing challenge: Prevalence of diabetes in young adults (Review). Decoding the evidence: A synopsis of indications and evidence for catheter ablation in atrial fibrillation (Review). Determination of a 'point of no return' in refractory chronic subdural hematomas: A case report and review of the literature.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1