超越测量:深入探讨术后疼痛评估中常用的疼痛量表。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Korean Journal of Pain Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.3344/kjp.24069
Seungeun Choi, Soo-Hyuk Yoon, Ho-Jin Lee
{"title":"超越测量:深入探讨术后疼痛评估中常用的疼痛量表。","authors":"Seungeun Choi, Soo-Hyuk Yoon, Ho-Jin Lee","doi":"10.3344/kjp.24069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This review explores the essential methodologies for effective postoperative pain management, focusing on the need for thorough pain assessment tools, as underscored in various existing guidelines. Herein, the strengths and weaknesses of commonly used pain scales for postoperative pain-the Visual Analog Scale, Numeric Rating Scale, Verbal Rating Scale, and Faces Pain Scale-are evaluated, highlighting the importance of selecting appropriate assessment tools based on factors influencing their effectiveness in surgical contexts. By emphasizing the need to comprehend the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for these scales in evaluating new analgesic interventions and monitoring pain trajectories over time, this review advocates recognizing the limitations of common pain scales to improve pain assessment strategies, ultimately enhancing postoperative pain management. Finally, five recommendations for pain assessment in research on postoperative pain are provided: first, selecting an appropriate pain scale tailored to the patient group, considering the strengths and weaknesses of each scale; second, simultaneously assessing the intensity of postoperative pain at rest and during movement; third, conducting evaluations at specific time points and monitoring trends over time; fourth, extending the focus beyond the intensity of postoperative pain to include its impact on postoperative functional recovery; and lastly, interpreting the findings while considering the MCID, ensuring that it is clinically significant for the chosen pain scale. These recommendations broaden our understanding of postoperative pain and provide insights that contribute to more effective pain management strategies, thereby enhancing patient care outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":56252,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Pain","volume":" ","pages":"188-200"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11220383/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond measurement: a deep dive into the commonly used pain scales for postoperative pain assessment.\",\"authors\":\"Seungeun Choi, Soo-Hyuk Yoon, Ho-Jin Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.3344/kjp.24069\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This review explores the essential methodologies for effective postoperative pain management, focusing on the need for thorough pain assessment tools, as underscored in various existing guidelines. Herein, the strengths and weaknesses of commonly used pain scales for postoperative pain-the Visual Analog Scale, Numeric Rating Scale, Verbal Rating Scale, and Faces Pain Scale-are evaluated, highlighting the importance of selecting appropriate assessment tools based on factors influencing their effectiveness in surgical contexts. By emphasizing the need to comprehend the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for these scales in evaluating new analgesic interventions and monitoring pain trajectories over time, this review advocates recognizing the limitations of common pain scales to improve pain assessment strategies, ultimately enhancing postoperative pain management. Finally, five recommendations for pain assessment in research on postoperative pain are provided: first, selecting an appropriate pain scale tailored to the patient group, considering the strengths and weaknesses of each scale; second, simultaneously assessing the intensity of postoperative pain at rest and during movement; third, conducting evaluations at specific time points and monitoring trends over time; fourth, extending the focus beyond the intensity of postoperative pain to include its impact on postoperative functional recovery; and lastly, interpreting the findings while considering the MCID, ensuring that it is clinically significant for the chosen pain scale. These recommendations broaden our understanding of postoperative pain and provide insights that contribute to more effective pain management strategies, thereby enhancing patient care outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56252,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean Journal of Pain\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"188-200\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11220383/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean Journal of Pain\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.24069\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.24069","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本综述探讨了有效术后疼痛管理的基本方法,重点是现有各种指南中强调的对全面疼痛评估工具的需求。本文评估了术后疼痛常用疼痛量表--视觉模拟量表、数字评分量表、言语评分量表和面孔疼痛量表--的优缺点,强调了根据影响其在手术环境中有效性的因素选择适当评估工具的重要性。通过强调在评估新的镇痛干预措施和监测疼痛随时间变化的轨迹时需要了解这些量表的最小临床重要差异(MCID),本综述提倡认识到常见疼痛量表的局限性,以改进疼痛评估策略,最终加强术后疼痛管理。最后,本文对术后疼痛研究中的疼痛评估提出了五点建议:第一,根据患者群体选择合适的疼痛量表,同时考虑每种量表的优缺点;第二,同时评估休息时和运动时的术后疼痛强度;第三,在特定的时间点进行评估,并监测随时间变化的趋势;第四,将重点从术后疼痛强度扩展到其对术后功能恢复的影响;最后,在解释研究结果时考虑 MCID,确保其对所选疼痛量表具有临床意义。这些建议拓宽了我们对术后疼痛的理解,并提供了有助于制定更有效疼痛管理策略的见解,从而提高了患者护理效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Beyond measurement: a deep dive into the commonly used pain scales for postoperative pain assessment.

This review explores the essential methodologies for effective postoperative pain management, focusing on the need for thorough pain assessment tools, as underscored in various existing guidelines. Herein, the strengths and weaknesses of commonly used pain scales for postoperative pain-the Visual Analog Scale, Numeric Rating Scale, Verbal Rating Scale, and Faces Pain Scale-are evaluated, highlighting the importance of selecting appropriate assessment tools based on factors influencing their effectiveness in surgical contexts. By emphasizing the need to comprehend the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for these scales in evaluating new analgesic interventions and monitoring pain trajectories over time, this review advocates recognizing the limitations of common pain scales to improve pain assessment strategies, ultimately enhancing postoperative pain management. Finally, five recommendations for pain assessment in research on postoperative pain are provided: first, selecting an appropriate pain scale tailored to the patient group, considering the strengths and weaknesses of each scale; second, simultaneously assessing the intensity of postoperative pain at rest and during movement; third, conducting evaluations at specific time points and monitoring trends over time; fourth, extending the focus beyond the intensity of postoperative pain to include its impact on postoperative functional recovery; and lastly, interpreting the findings while considering the MCID, ensuring that it is clinically significant for the chosen pain scale. These recommendations broaden our understanding of postoperative pain and provide insights that contribute to more effective pain management strategies, thereby enhancing patient care outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Korean Journal of Pain
Korean Journal of Pain Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
57
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Korean Journal of Pain (Korean J Pain, KJP) is the official journal of the Korean Pain Society, founded in 1986. It has been published since 1988. It publishes peer reviewed original articles related to all aspects of pain, including clinical and basic research, patient care, education, and health policy. It has been published quarterly in English since 2009 (on the first day of January, April, July, and October). In addition, it has also become the official journal of the International Spinal Pain Society since 2016. The mission of the Journal is to improve the care of patients in pain by providing a forum for clinical researchers, basic scientists, clinicians, and other health professionals. The circulation number per issue is 50.
期刊最新文献
Ultrasound-guided pain management: pros, cons, and benefits for the Philippines. Retraction: Comparison of the efficacy of genicular nerve phenol neurolysis and radiofrequency ablation for pain management in patients with knee osteoarthritis. A critical factor in resistant piriformis syndrome cases: awareness of sacrotuberous ligament pain. Effect of ultrasound-guided ilioinguinal-iliohypogastric nerve block on chronic pain in patients undergoing open inguinal hernia surgery under spinal anesthesia: a randomized double-blind study. Ultrasound-guided transoral pterygopalatine fossa block: cadaveric elaboration of a novel technique.
×
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