Cargando…
Pain as bad as you can imagine or extremely severe pain? A randomized controlled trial comparing two pain scale anchors
BACKGROUND: A common method of pain assessment is the numerical rating scale, where patients are asked to rate their pain on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 is “no pain” and 10 is “pain as bad as you can imagine”. We hypothesize such language is suboptimal as it involves a test of a cognitive skill, i...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10686922/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38019328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-023-00665-w |
_version_ | 1785151869778132992 |
---|---|
author | Tin, Amy L. Austria, Mia Ogbennaya, Gabriel Chimonas, Susan Andréll, Paulin Atkinson, Thomas M. Vickers, Andrew J. Carlsson, Sigrid V. |
author_facet | Tin, Amy L. Austria, Mia Ogbennaya, Gabriel Chimonas, Susan Andréll, Paulin Atkinson, Thomas M. Vickers, Andrew J. Carlsson, Sigrid V. |
author_sort | Tin, Amy L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: A common method of pain assessment is the numerical rating scale, where patients are asked to rate their pain on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 is “no pain” and 10 is “pain as bad as you can imagine”. We hypothesize such language is suboptimal as it involves a test of a cognitive skill, imagination, in the assessment of symptom severity. METHODS: We used a large-scale online research registry, ResearchMatch, to conduct a randomized controlled trial to compare the distributions of pain scores of two different pain scale anchors. We recruited adults located in the United States who reported a chronic pain problem (> 3 months) and were currently in pain. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive pain assessment based on a modified Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), where the anchor for a score of 10 was either “extremely severe pain”, or the original BPI, with the anchor “pain as bad as you can imagine”. Participants in both groups also answered additional questions about pain, other symptomatology and creativity. RESULTS: Data were obtained from 405 participants for the modified and 424 for the original BPI. Distribution of responses to pain questions were similar between groups (all p-values ≥ 0.12). We did not see evidence that the relationship between pain score and the anchor text differed based on self-perceived creativity (all interaction p-values ≥ 0.2). However, in the key analysis, correlations between current pain assessments and known correlates (fatigue, anxiety, depression, current pain compared to a typical day, pain compared to other people) were stronger for “extreme” vs. “imaginable” anchor text (p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Pain rating scales should utilize the modified anchor text “extremely severe pain” instead of “pain as bad as you can imagine”. Further research should explore the effects of anchors for other symptoms. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-023-00665-w. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10686922 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106869222023-11-30 Pain as bad as you can imagine or extremely severe pain? A randomized controlled trial comparing two pain scale anchors Tin, Amy L. Austria, Mia Ogbennaya, Gabriel Chimonas, Susan Andréll, Paulin Atkinson, Thomas M. Vickers, Andrew J. Carlsson, Sigrid V. J Patient Rep Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: A common method of pain assessment is the numerical rating scale, where patients are asked to rate their pain on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 is “no pain” and 10 is “pain as bad as you can imagine”. We hypothesize such language is suboptimal as it involves a test of a cognitive skill, imagination, in the assessment of symptom severity. METHODS: We used a large-scale online research registry, ResearchMatch, to conduct a randomized controlled trial to compare the distributions of pain scores of two different pain scale anchors. We recruited adults located in the United States who reported a chronic pain problem (> 3 months) and were currently in pain. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive pain assessment based on a modified Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), where the anchor for a score of 10 was either “extremely severe pain”, or the original BPI, with the anchor “pain as bad as you can imagine”. Participants in both groups also answered additional questions about pain, other symptomatology and creativity. RESULTS: Data were obtained from 405 participants for the modified and 424 for the original BPI. Distribution of responses to pain questions were similar between groups (all p-values ≥ 0.12). We did not see evidence that the relationship between pain score and the anchor text differed based on self-perceived creativity (all interaction p-values ≥ 0.2). However, in the key analysis, correlations between current pain assessments and known correlates (fatigue, anxiety, depression, current pain compared to a typical day, pain compared to other people) were stronger for “extreme” vs. “imaginable” anchor text (p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Pain rating scales should utilize the modified anchor text “extremely severe pain” instead of “pain as bad as you can imagine”. Further research should explore the effects of anchors for other symptoms. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-023-00665-w. Springer International Publishing 2023-11-29 /pmc/articles/PMC10686922/ /pubmed/38019328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-023-00665-w Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Research Tin, Amy L. Austria, Mia Ogbennaya, Gabriel Chimonas, Susan Andréll, Paulin Atkinson, Thomas M. Vickers, Andrew J. Carlsson, Sigrid V. Pain as bad as you can imagine or extremely severe pain? A randomized controlled trial comparing two pain scale anchors |
title | Pain as bad as you can imagine or extremely severe pain? A randomized controlled trial comparing two pain scale anchors |
title_full | Pain as bad as you can imagine or extremely severe pain? A randomized controlled trial comparing two pain scale anchors |
title_fullStr | Pain as bad as you can imagine or extremely severe pain? A randomized controlled trial comparing two pain scale anchors |
title_full_unstemmed | Pain as bad as you can imagine or extremely severe pain? A randomized controlled trial comparing two pain scale anchors |
title_short | Pain as bad as you can imagine or extremely severe pain? A randomized controlled trial comparing two pain scale anchors |
title_sort | pain as bad as you can imagine or extremely severe pain? a randomized controlled trial comparing two pain scale anchors |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10686922/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38019328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-023-00665-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tinamyl painasbadasyoucanimagineorextremelyseverepainarandomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingtwopainscaleanchors AT austriamia painasbadasyoucanimagineorextremelyseverepainarandomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingtwopainscaleanchors AT ogbennayagabriel painasbadasyoucanimagineorextremelyseverepainarandomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingtwopainscaleanchors AT chimonassusan painasbadasyoucanimagineorextremelyseverepainarandomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingtwopainscaleanchors AT andrellpaulin painasbadasyoucanimagineorextremelyseverepainarandomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingtwopainscaleanchors AT atkinsonthomasm painasbadasyoucanimagineorextremelyseverepainarandomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingtwopainscaleanchors AT vickersandrewj painasbadasyoucanimagineorextremelyseverepainarandomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingtwopainscaleanchors AT carlssonsigridv painasbadasyoucanimagineorextremelyseverepainarandomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingtwopainscaleanchors |