INTRODUCTION: Several tools for pain measurement including a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and a Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) are currently used in patients with chronic pain. The aim of the present study was to determine which of these two pain tests performs optimally in patients following groin hernia repair. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A questionnaire identified pain level in a cohort of patients that had previously undergone corrective groin hernia surgery. Current pain intensity was graded on a four-point VRS scale (no pain, mild, moderate or severe pain) and on a 100-mm VAS scale (0=no pain, 100=unbearable). "Scale failure" (one or both tests not completed correctly) was determined, and cut-off points for the VAS test were calculated by creating the optimum kappa coefficient between both tools. RESULTS: The response rate was 78.2% (706/903). Scale failure was present in VAS tests more than VRS (VAS: 12.5%, 88/706 vs. VRS: 2.8%, 20/706; P<0.001). Advanced age was a risk factor for scale failure (P<0.001). The four categories of VRS corresponded to mean VAS scores of 1, 20, 42, and 78 mm, respectively. VAS categories associated with the highest kappa coefficient (k=0.78) were as follows: 0-8=no pain, 9-32=mild, 33-71=moderate, >71=severe pain. VAS scores grouped per VRS category showed considerable overlap. Age and sex did not significantly influence cut-off points. CONCLUSIONS: Because of lower scale failure rates and overlapping VAS scores per VRS category, the VRS should be favored over the VAS in future postherniorrhaphy pain assessment. If VAS is preferred, the presented cut-off points should be utilized.
INTRODUCTION: Several tools for pain measurement including a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and a Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) are currently used in patients with chronic pain. The aim of the present study was to determine which of these two pain tests performs optimally in patients following groin hernia repair. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A questionnaire identified pain level in a cohort of patients that had previously undergone corrective groin hernia surgery. Current pain intensity was graded on a four-point VRS scale (no pain, mild, moderate or severe pain) and on a 100-mm VAS scale (0=no pain, 100=unbearable). "Scale failure" (one or both tests not completed correctly) was determined, and cut-off points for the VAS test were calculated by creating the optimum kappa coefficient between both tools. RESULTS: The response rate was 78.2% (706/903). Scale failure was present in VAS tests more than VRS (VAS: 12.5%, 88/706 vs. VRS: 2.8%, 20/706; P<0.001). Advanced age was a risk factor for scale failure (P<0.001). The four categories of VRS corresponded to mean VAS scores of 1, 20, 42, and 78 mm, respectively. VAS categories associated with the highest kappa coefficient (k=0.78) were as follows: 0-8=no pain, 9-32=mild, 33-71=moderate, >71=severe pain. VAS scores grouped per VRS category showed considerable overlap. Age and sex did not significantly influence cut-off points. CONCLUSIONS: Because of lower scale failure rates and overlapping VAS scores per VRS category, the VRS should be favored over the VAS in future postherniorrhaphy pain assessment. If VAS is preferred, the presented cut-off points should be utilized.
Authors: Iréne Lund; Thomas Lundeberg; Louise Sandberg; Cecilia Norrbrink Budh; Jan Kowalski; Elisabeth Svensson Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2005-10-04 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: M M Poelman; B van den Heuvel; J D Deelder; G S A Abis; N Beudeker; R R Bittner; G Campanelli; D van Dam; B J Dwars; H H Eker; A Fingerhut; I Khatkov; F Koeckerling; J F Kukleta; M Miserez; A Montgomery; R M Munoz Brands; S Morales Conde; F E Muysoms; M Soltes; W Tromp; Y Yavuz; H J Bonjer Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-05-25 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: J P J Burgmans; N Schouten; G J Clevers; E J M M Verleisdonk; P H P Davids; C E H Voorbrood; R K J Simmermacher; T Van Dalen Journal: Hernia Date: 2015-04-22 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: F Muysoms; G Vander Mijnsbrugge; P Pletinckx; E Boldo; I Jacobs; M Michiels; R Ceulemans Journal: Hernia Date: 2013-04-02 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: J P J Burgmans; C E H Voorbrood; N Schouten; N Smakman; S Elias; G J Clevers; P H P Davids; E J M M Verleisdonk; M E Hamaker; R K J Simmermacher; T van Dalen Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-01-01 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: C E H Voorbrood; J P J Burgmans; T Van Dalen; J Breel; G J Clevers; F Wille; R K J Simmermacher Journal: Hernia Date: 2015-05-09 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: U A Dietz; M S Winkler; R W Härtel; A Fleischhacker; A Wiegering; C Isbert; Ch Jurowich; P Heuschmann; C-T Germer Journal: Hernia Date: 2012-10-16 Impact factor: 4.739