Literature DB >> 17368110

Influence and stability of pain scale anchors for an investigation of cold pressor pain tolerance.

Erin A Dannecker1, Steven Z George, Michael E Robinson.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Variable use of pain scale anchors may influence recalled pain ratings, rating consistency, and agreement between actual rating change and ratings of pain relief. This investigation examined change in events that represent maximal pain scale anchors. Participants (N = 68, 50% women) provided events for maximal anchors of 0 to 100 pain scales, and cold pressor pain was rated by using self-selected event/s and an investigator-provided event. Participants then were allowed to change their self-selected event/s. The revised event/s or original events were then used to rate a second cold pressor trial. Forty-one percent of participants changed event/s, and the new event/s was more likely to involve cold or heat, but the painfulness of events and the pain ratings of the second trial did not change. The cold pressor pain ratings were higher when rated on the basis of self-selected event/s than the investigator-provided event for intensity (mean = 80.13, SD = 19.30; mean = 60.81, SD = 27.45) and unpleasantness (mean = 80.84, SD = 19.07; mean = 59.07, SD = 27.53), which could be due to the submaximal painfulness of the investigator-provided event. Therefore, the width of numerical scales is stable with maximal events regardless of the actual events. PERSPECTIVE: This report identifies change in physical events that are used by participants to represent maximal pain scale anchors and suggests that the maximal nature of the events' painfulness is more important than variability in the actual events. We conclude that the numerical pain scales we used are understandable and stable, but we suggest that instructional sets for pain measurement may be improved by evaluation of the painfulness of events that respondents use to conceptualize maximal pain scale anchors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17368110      PMCID: PMC1945154          DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2007.01.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pain        ISSN: 1526-5900            Impact factor:   5.820


  38 in total

1.  Distraction produces an increase in pain-evoked anterior cingulate activity.

Authors:  Robert Dowman
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.016

2.  The subjective experience of acute pain. An assessment of the utility of 10 indices.

Authors:  M P Jensen; P Karoly; E F O'Riordan; F Bland; R S Burns
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 3.442

3.  Capturing the patient's view of change as a clinical outcome measure.

Authors:  D Fischer; A L Stewart; D A Bloch; K Lorig; D Laurent; H Holman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999 Sep 22-29       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  The measurement of clinical pain intensity: a comparison of six methods.

Authors:  Mark P Jensen; Paul Karoly; Sanford Braver
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 6.961

5.  Increasing the reliability and validity of pain intensity measurement in chronic pain patients.

Authors:  M P Jensen; C A McFarland
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 6.961

6.  Electronic diary assessment of pain-related variables: is reactivity a problem?

Authors:  Leslie A Aaron; Judith A Turner; Lloyd Mancl; Heather Brister; Craig N Sawchuk
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 5.820

7.  Influence of attention focus and trait anxiety on tolerance of acute pain.

Authors:  Jack E James; Drifa Hardardottir
Journal:  Br J Health Psychol       Date:  2002-05

8.  Reactive effects of measurement of pain.

Authors:  C L von Baeyer
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 3.442

9.  Memory for pain and affect in chronic pain patients.

Authors:  Richard A Bryant
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 6.961

10.  Intensive momentary reporting of pain with an electronic diary: reactivity, compliance, and patient satisfaction.

Authors:  Arthur A Stone; Joan E Broderick; Joseph E Schwartz; Saul Shiffman; Leighann Litcher-Kelly; Pamela Calvanese
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 6.961

View more
  9 in total

1.  Preoperative Education for Less Outpatient Pain after Surgery (PELOPS trial) in orthopedic patients-study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Mikhail Dziadzko; Axelle Bouteleux; Raphael Minjard; Jack Harich; Fanny Joubert; Pierre Pradat; Solene Pantel; Frederic Aubrun
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2022-05-21       Impact factor: 2.728

2.  Ecological Momentary Assessment Methodology in Chronic Pain Research: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Marcella May; Doerte U Junghaenel; Masakatsu Ono; Arthur A Stone; Stefan Schneider
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2018-01-31       Impact factor: 5.820

3.  Do past pain events systematically impact pain ratings of healthy subjects or fibromyalgia patients?

Authors:  Roland Staud; Michael E Robinson; Donald D Price
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2009-09-26       Impact factor: 5.820

4.  The International Spinal Cord Injury Pain Extended Data Set (Version 1.0).

Authors:  E Widerström-Noga; F Biering-Sørensen; T N Bryce; D D Cardenas; N B Finnerup; M P Jensen; J S Richards; E J Richardson; P J Siddall
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2016-04-12       Impact factor: 2.772

5.  Age Group Comparisons of TENS Response Among Individuals With Chronic Axial Low Back Pain.

Authors:  Corey B Simon; Joseph L Riley; Roger B Fillingim; Mark D Bishop; Steven Z George
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2015-09-03       Impact factor: 5.820

6.  Thermal QST Phenotypes Associated with Response to Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injections: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Dermot P Maher; Weihua Ding; Sarabdeep Singh; Arissa Opalacz; Claire Fishman; Mary Houghton; Shihab Ahmed; Lucy Chen; Jianren Mao; Yi Zhang
Journal:  Pain Med       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 3.750

7.  Biopsychosocial factors associated with chronic low back pain disability in rural Nigeria: a population-based cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Chinonso Nwamaka Igwesi-Chidobe; Bolaji Coker; Chika N Onwasigwe; Isaac O Sorinola; Emma L Godfrey
Journal:  BMJ Glob Health       Date:  2017-09-15

8.  Pain rating schema: three distinct subgroups of individuals emerge when rating mild, moderate, and severe pain.

Authors:  Laura A Frey-Law; Jennifer E Lee; Alex M Wittry; Myles Melyon
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2013-12-23       Impact factor: 3.133

9.  Challenges and opportunities in translational pain research - An opinion paper of the working group on translational pain research of the European pain federation (EFIC).

Authors:  André Mouraux; Kirsty Bannister; Susanne Becker; David P Finn; Gisèle Pickering; Esther Pogatzki-Zahn; Thomas Graven-Nielsen
Journal:  Eur J Pain       Date:  2021-02-24       Impact factor: 3.651

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.