Literature DB >> 17883744

Pain assessment in younger and older pain patients: psychometric properties and patient preference of five commonly used measures of pain intensity.

Madelon L Peters1, Jacob Patijn, Inge Lamé.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To study the psychometric properties and preference for five different pain intensity scales (horizontal visual analog scale [VAS], vertical VAS, Box-11, Box-21, and verbal descriptor scale) across different age groups.
DESIGN: Chronic pain patients rated their present, average, weakest, and strongest pain on five different scales, and indicated scale preference.
SETTING: Outpatient pain facility.
RESULTS: The number of mistakes on all scales increased with increasing age, and the VAS appeared to be most prone to making mistakes. All scales appeared to be sufficiently valid, but the verbal descriptor scale was less related to the common underlying pain factor than the other scales. The Box-21 was the most preferred scale overall, although patients aged >75 years especially preferred the verbal descriptor scale.
CONCLUSION: The numerical Box-21 scale is an excellent choice for pain intensity assessment in heterogeneous patient groups. The verbal descriptor scales may be considered when the study population consists of a majority of older persons.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17883744     DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2007.00311.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pain Med        ISSN: 1526-2375            Impact factor:   3.750


  15 in total

1.  Pain measurement in the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project: presence, intensity, and location.

Authors:  Joseph W Shega; Andrew D Tiedt; Kaelin Grant; William Dale
Journal:  J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 4.077

2.  Comparison of insulin diluent leakage postinjection using two different needle lengths and injection volumes in obese patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Debra A Ignaut; Haoda Fu
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2012-03-01

3.  The effect of oral and parenteral vitamin D supplementation in the elderly: a prospective, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled study.

Authors:  Hakan Sakalli; Didem Arslan; Ahmet Eftal Yucel
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2011-05-10       Impact factor: 2.631

4.  Comparison of numerical and verbal rating scales to measure pain exacerbations in patients with chronic cancer pain.

Authors:  Cinzia Brunelli; Ernesto Zecca; Cinzia Martini; Tiziana Campa; Elena Fagnoni; Michela Bagnasco; Luigi Lanata; Augusto Caraceni
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2010-04-22       Impact factor: 3.186

5.  Self-rated measure of pain frequency, intensity, and burden: psychometric properties of a new instrument for the assessment of pain.

Authors:  Adriane M dela Cruz; Ira H Bernstein; Tracy L Greer; Robrina Walker; Chad D Rethorst; Bruce Grannemann; Thomas Carmody; Madhukar H Trivedi
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2014-08-27       Impact factor: 4.791

Review 6.  Self-report pain assessment tools for cognitively intact older adults: Integrative review.

Authors:  Youjeong Kang; George Demiris
Journal:  Int J Older People Nurs       Date:  2017-10-05       Impact factor: 2.115

7.  The Verbal Rating Scale Is Reliable for Assessment of Postoperative Pain in Hip Fracture Patients.

Authors:  Rune Dueholm Bech; Jens Lauritsen; Ole Ovesen; Søren Overgaard
Journal:  Pain Res Treat       Date:  2015-05-20

8.  Measuring pain in patients undergoing hemodialysis: a review of pain assessment tools.

Authors:  Chandani Upadhyay; Karen Cameron; Laura Murphy; Marisa Battistella
Journal:  Clin Kidney J       Date:  2014-07-01

9.  Validation of three pain scales among adult postoperative patients in Ghana.

Authors:  Lydia Aziato; Florence Dedey; Kissinger Marfo; James Avoka Asamani; Joe Nat A Clegg-Lamptey
Journal:  BMC Nurs       Date:  2015-08-11

10.  Clinical trial participants' experiences of completing questionnaires: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Christine Holmberg; Julia J Karner; Julia Rappenecker; Claudia M Witt
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-03-24       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.