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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tin, Amy L., Austria, Mia, Ogbennaya, Gabriel, Chimonas, Susan, Andréll, Paulin, Atkinson, Thomas M., Vickers, Andrew J., Carlsson, Sigrid V.
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