Cargando…

The Discrepancy and Agreement between Patient-Reported Percentage Pain Reduction and Calculated Percentage Pain Reduction in Chronic Pain Patients

Two derivatives of the numeric rating scale (NRS) and visual analog scale (VAS), namely patient-reported percentage pain reduction (PRPPR) and calculated percentage pain reduction (CPPR), are commonly used when evaluating pain reduction. A small number of studies have attempted to assess the agreeme...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fink, Adam B., Ong, Charmaine, Sumar, Moez K., Patel, Neil C., Knezevic, Nebojsa Nick
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10123715/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37092506
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/neurolint15020034
_version_ 1785029717853732864
author Fink, Adam B.
Ong, Charmaine
Sumar, Moez K.
Patel, Neil C.
Knezevic, Nebojsa Nick
author_facet Fink, Adam B.
Ong, Charmaine
Sumar, Moez K.
Patel, Neil C.
Knezevic, Nebojsa Nick
author_sort Fink, Adam B.
collection PubMed
description Two derivatives of the numeric rating scale (NRS) and visual analog scale (VAS), namely patient-reported percentage pain reduction (PRPPR) and calculated percentage pain reduction (CPPR), are commonly used when evaluating pain reduction. A small number of studies have attempted to assess the agreement between PRPPR and CPPR. However, they have been limited in their scope by a focus on specific types of pain, or by their focus on specific treatment modalities. As far as the authors of this article are aware, this is the first study to assess the agreement between PRPPR and CPPR in chronic pain patients, as well as the first to assess how the duration of treatment affects the correlations between PRPPR and CPPR. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to determine whether the duration of treatment affects CPPR and PRPPR, and the discrepancy and agreement between the two. Additionally, the study assessed whether individual treatment modalities, or the lack there of, impacted the discrepancy and correlation between PRPPR and CPPR. The mean PRPPR and CPPR for the entire patient population were 59.98 and 40.71, respectively. The mean discrepancy between the two parameters was 19.27. The agreement between PRPPR and CPPR, as measured by the concordance correlation coefficient, was 0.984 (95% C.I., 0.982–0.986).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10123715
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101237152023-04-25 The Discrepancy and Agreement between Patient-Reported Percentage Pain Reduction and Calculated Percentage Pain Reduction in Chronic Pain Patients Fink, Adam B. Ong, Charmaine Sumar, Moez K. Patel, Neil C. Knezevic, Nebojsa Nick Neurol Int Article Two derivatives of the numeric rating scale (NRS) and visual analog scale (VAS), namely patient-reported percentage pain reduction (PRPPR) and calculated percentage pain reduction (CPPR), are commonly used when evaluating pain reduction. A small number of studies have attempted to assess the agreement between PRPPR and CPPR. However, they have been limited in their scope by a focus on specific types of pain, or by their focus on specific treatment modalities. As far as the authors of this article are aware, this is the first study to assess the agreement between PRPPR and CPPR in chronic pain patients, as well as the first to assess how the duration of treatment affects the correlations between PRPPR and CPPR. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to determine whether the duration of treatment affects CPPR and PRPPR, and the discrepancy and agreement between the two. Additionally, the study assessed whether individual treatment modalities, or the lack there of, impacted the discrepancy and correlation between PRPPR and CPPR. The mean PRPPR and CPPR for the entire patient population were 59.98 and 40.71, respectively. The mean discrepancy between the two parameters was 19.27. The agreement between PRPPR and CPPR, as measured by the concordance correlation coefficient, was 0.984 (95% C.I., 0.982–0.986). MDPI 2023-04-04 /pmc/articles/PMC10123715/ /pubmed/37092506 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/neurolint15020034 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Fink, Adam B.
Ong, Charmaine
Sumar, Moez K.
Patel, Neil C.
Knezevic, Nebojsa Nick
The Discrepancy and Agreement between Patient-Reported Percentage Pain Reduction and Calculated Percentage Pain Reduction in Chronic Pain Patients
title The Discrepancy and Agreement between Patient-Reported Percentage Pain Reduction and Calculated Percentage Pain Reduction in Chronic Pain Patients
title_full The Discrepancy and Agreement between Patient-Reported Percentage Pain Reduction and Calculated Percentage Pain Reduction in Chronic Pain Patients
title_fullStr The Discrepancy and Agreement between Patient-Reported Percentage Pain Reduction and Calculated Percentage Pain Reduction in Chronic Pain Patients
title_full_unstemmed The Discrepancy and Agreement between Patient-Reported Percentage Pain Reduction and Calculated Percentage Pain Reduction in Chronic Pain Patients
title_short The Discrepancy and Agreement between Patient-Reported Percentage Pain Reduction and Calculated Percentage Pain Reduction in Chronic Pain Patients
title_sort discrepancy and agreement between patient-reported percentage pain reduction and calculated percentage pain reduction in chronic pain patients
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10123715/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37092506
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/neurolint15020034
work_keys_str_mv AT finkadamb thediscrepancyandagreementbetweenpatientreportedpercentagepainreductionandcalculatedpercentagepainreductioninchronicpainpatients
AT ongcharmaine thediscrepancyandagreementbetweenpatientreportedpercentagepainreductionandcalculatedpercentagepainreductioninchronicpainpatients
AT sumarmoezk thediscrepancyandagreementbetweenpatientreportedpercentagepainreductionandcalculatedpercentagepainreductioninchronicpainpatients
AT patelneilc thediscrepancyandagreementbetweenpatientreportedpercentagepainreductionandcalculatedpercentagepainreductioninchronicpainpatients
AT knezevicnebojsanick thediscrepancyandagreementbetweenpatientreportedpercentagepainreductionandcalculatedpercentagepainreductioninchronicpainpatients
AT finkadamb discrepancyandagreementbetweenpatientreportedpercentagepainreductionandcalculatedpercentagepainreductioninchronicpainpatients
AT ongcharmaine discrepancyandagreementbetweenpatientreportedpercentagepainreductionandcalculatedpercentagepainreductioninchronicpainpatients
AT sumarmoezk discrepancyandagreementbetweenpatientreportedpercentagepainreductionandcalculatedpercentagepainreductioninchronicpainpatients
AT patelneilc discrepancyandagreementbetweenpatientreportedpercentagepainreductionandcalculatedpercentagepainreductioninchronicpainpatients
AT knezevicnebojsanick discrepancyandagreementbetweenpatientreportedpercentagepainreductionandcalculatedpercentagepainreductioninchronicpainpatients