Cargando…

A Novel Tool for the Assessment of Pain: Validation in Low Back Pain

BACKGROUND: Adequate pain assessment is critical for evaluating the efficacy of analgesic treatment in clinical practice and during the development of new therapies. Yet the currently used scores of global pain intensity fail to reflect the diversity of pain manifestations and the complexity of unde...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Scholz, Joachim, Mannion, Richard J., Hord, Daniela E., Griffin, Robert S., Rawal, Bhupendra, Zheng, Hui, Scoffings, Daniel, Phillips, Amanda, Guo, Jianli, Laing, Rodney J. C., Abdi, Salahadin, Decosterd, Isabelle, Woolf, Clifford J.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2661253/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19360087
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000047
_version_ 1782165792415023104
author Scholz, Joachim
Mannion, Richard J.
Hord, Daniela E.
Griffin, Robert S.
Rawal, Bhupendra
Zheng, Hui
Scoffings, Daniel
Phillips, Amanda
Guo, Jianli
Laing, Rodney J. C.
Abdi, Salahadin
Decosterd, Isabelle
Woolf, Clifford J.
author_facet Scholz, Joachim
Mannion, Richard J.
Hord, Daniela E.
Griffin, Robert S.
Rawal, Bhupendra
Zheng, Hui
Scoffings, Daniel
Phillips, Amanda
Guo, Jianli
Laing, Rodney J. C.
Abdi, Salahadin
Decosterd, Isabelle
Woolf, Clifford J.
author_sort Scholz, Joachim
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Adequate pain assessment is critical for evaluating the efficacy of analgesic treatment in clinical practice and during the development of new therapies. Yet the currently used scores of global pain intensity fail to reflect the diversity of pain manifestations and the complexity of underlying biological mechanisms. We have developed a tool for a standardized assessment of pain-related symptoms and signs that differentiates pain phenotypes independent of etiology. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using a structured interview (16 questions) and a standardized bedside examination (23 tests), we prospectively assessed symptoms and signs in 130 patients with peripheral neuropathic pain caused by diabetic polyneuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, or radicular low back pain (LBP), and in 57 patients with non-neuropathic (axial) LBP. A hierarchical cluster analysis revealed distinct association patterns of symptoms and signs (pain subtypes) that characterized six subgroups of patients with neuropathic pain and two subgroups of patients with non-neuropathic pain. Using a classification tree analysis, we identified the most discriminatory assessment items for the identification of pain subtypes. We combined these six interview questions and ten physical tests in a pain assessment tool that we named Standardized Evaluation of Pain (StEP). We validated StEP for the distinction between radicular and axial LBP in an independent group of 137 patients. StEP identified patients with radicular pain with high sensitivity (92%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 83%–97%) and specificity (97%; 95% CI 89%–100%). The diagnostic accuracy of StEP exceeded that of a dedicated screening tool for neuropathic pain and spinal magnetic resonance imaging. In addition, we were able to reproduce subtypes of radicular and axial LBP, underscoring the utility of StEP for discerning distinct constellations of symptoms and signs. CONCLUSIONS: We present a novel method of identifying pain subtypes that we believe reflect underlying pain mechanisms. We demonstrate that this new approach to pain assessment helps separate radicular from axial back pain. Beyond diagnostic utility, a standardized differentiation of pain subtypes that is independent of disease etiology may offer a unique opportunity to improve targeted analgesic treatment.
format Text
id pubmed-2661253
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-26612532009-04-08 A Novel Tool for the Assessment of Pain: Validation in Low Back Pain Scholz, Joachim Mannion, Richard J. Hord, Daniela E. Griffin, Robert S. Rawal, Bhupendra Zheng, Hui Scoffings, Daniel Phillips, Amanda Guo, Jianli Laing, Rodney J. C. Abdi, Salahadin Decosterd, Isabelle Woolf, Clifford J. PLoS Med Research Article BACKGROUND: Adequate pain assessment is critical for evaluating the efficacy of analgesic treatment in clinical practice and during the development of new therapies. Yet the currently used scores of global pain intensity fail to reflect the diversity of pain manifestations and the complexity of underlying biological mechanisms. We have developed a tool for a standardized assessment of pain-related symptoms and signs that differentiates pain phenotypes independent of etiology. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using a structured interview (16 questions) and a standardized bedside examination (23 tests), we prospectively assessed symptoms and signs in 130 patients with peripheral neuropathic pain caused by diabetic polyneuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, or radicular low back pain (LBP), and in 57 patients with non-neuropathic (axial) LBP. A hierarchical cluster analysis revealed distinct association patterns of symptoms and signs (pain subtypes) that characterized six subgroups of patients with neuropathic pain and two subgroups of patients with non-neuropathic pain. Using a classification tree analysis, we identified the most discriminatory assessment items for the identification of pain subtypes. We combined these six interview questions and ten physical tests in a pain assessment tool that we named Standardized Evaluation of Pain (StEP). We validated StEP for the distinction between radicular and axial LBP in an independent group of 137 patients. StEP identified patients with radicular pain with high sensitivity (92%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 83%–97%) and specificity (97%; 95% CI 89%–100%). The diagnostic accuracy of StEP exceeded that of a dedicated screening tool for neuropathic pain and spinal magnetic resonance imaging. In addition, we were able to reproduce subtypes of radicular and axial LBP, underscoring the utility of StEP for discerning distinct constellations of symptoms and signs. CONCLUSIONS: We present a novel method of identifying pain subtypes that we believe reflect underlying pain mechanisms. We demonstrate that this new approach to pain assessment helps separate radicular from axial back pain. Beyond diagnostic utility, a standardized differentiation of pain subtypes that is independent of disease etiology may offer a unique opportunity to improve targeted analgesic treatment. Public Library of Science 2009-04-07 /pmc/articles/PMC2661253/ /pubmed/19360087 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000047 Text en Scholz et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Scholz, Joachim
Mannion, Richard J.
Hord, Daniela E.
Griffin, Robert S.
Rawal, Bhupendra
Zheng, Hui
Scoffings, Daniel
Phillips, Amanda
Guo, Jianli
Laing, Rodney J. C.
Abdi, Salahadin
Decosterd, Isabelle
Woolf, Clifford J.
A Novel Tool for the Assessment of Pain: Validation in Low Back Pain
title A Novel Tool for the Assessment of Pain: Validation in Low Back Pain
title_full A Novel Tool for the Assessment of Pain: Validation in Low Back Pain
title_fullStr A Novel Tool for the Assessment of Pain: Validation in Low Back Pain
title_full_unstemmed A Novel Tool for the Assessment of Pain: Validation in Low Back Pain
title_short A Novel Tool for the Assessment of Pain: Validation in Low Back Pain
title_sort novel tool for the assessment of pain: validation in low back pain
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2661253/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19360087
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000047
work_keys_str_mv AT scholzjoachim anoveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT mannionrichardj anoveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT horddanielae anoveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT griffinroberts anoveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT rawalbhupendra anoveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT zhenghui anoveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT scoffingsdaniel anoveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT phillipsamanda anoveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT guojianli anoveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT laingrodneyjc anoveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT abdisalahadin anoveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT decosterdisabelle anoveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT woolfcliffordj anoveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT scholzjoachim noveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT mannionrichardj noveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT horddanielae noveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT griffinroberts noveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT rawalbhupendra noveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT zhenghui noveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT scoffingsdaniel noveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT phillipsamanda noveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT guojianli noveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT laingrodneyjc noveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT abdisalahadin noveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT decosterdisabelle noveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain
AT woolfcliffordj noveltoolfortheassessmentofpainvalidationinlowbackpain