Literature DB >> 18415325

[Measurement of pain.].

E V Gablenz1, B Heinen, D Kirsch, E Lanz.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate a new modified visual analog scale, called the dolorimeter, together with a verbal rating scale (VRS) and a linear visual scale (VAS), in the measurement of acute postoperative pain. The scales were evaluated with reference to their sensitivity, reliability and validity, and correlation. During the study 200 patients 11-70 years of age (125 men, 75 women) were interviewed after orthopedic surgery to ascertain the intensity of the pain. We had the patients judge the intensity of pain before and 1 h after giving analgesics by using the dolorimeter, VRS, and VAS. At the end of the examination, we asked the patients whether the pain had decreased or not which method they preferred, and why they preferred this method. The results of this interrogation proved that the sensitivity of the VRS is low; its parameters overlap greatly on the analog, scale, and it is therefore too rough to be a sufficient measurement of pain. On the other hand, the high sensitivity of the two analog scales which patients can use to determine their individual pain intensity proved to be much more sensitive. All three methods correlated statistically; the highest correlation coefficients were found between the analog scales VAS and the dolorimeter. Because the dolorimeter is clearly preferred to the other methods, especially by elderly patients, we came to the conclusion that the dolorimeter is less abstract than the VAS and more practical to handle.

Entities:  

Year:  1988        PMID: 18415325     DOI: 10.1007/BF02528613

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Schmerz        ISSN: 0932-433X            Impact factor:   1.107


  29 in total

1.  The reliability of a linear analogue for evaluating pain.

Authors:  S I Revill; J O Robinson; M Rosen; M I Hogg
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  1976-11       Impact factor: 6.955

2.  The language of pain: intensity.

Authors:  C A Bailey; P O Davidson
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1976-09       Impact factor: 6.961

3.  Autonomic measures and behavioral indices of pain sensitivity.

Authors:  John Dowling
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1983-06       Impact factor: 6.961

4.  Pain measurement: an overview.

Authors:  C R Chapman; K L Casey; R Dubner; K M Foley; R H Gracely; A E Reading
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1985-05       Impact factor: 6.961

5.  Analgesic responses to morphine and placebo in individuals with postoperative pain.

Authors:  J D Levine; N C Gordon; R Smith; H L Fields
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1981-06       Impact factor: 6.961

6.  Measurement of pain: patient preference does not confound pain measurement.

Authors:  E Kremer; J H Atkinson; R J Ignelzi
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1981-04       Impact factor: 6.961

7.  Memory for pain.

Authors:  Myra Hunter; Clare Philips; Stanley Rachman
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1979-02       Impact factor: 6.961

8.  Factors of the langugage of pain in patient and volunteer groups.

Authors:  David J Crockett; Kenneth M Prkachin; Kenneth D Craig
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1977-12       Impact factor: 6.961

9.  Affective and sensory dimensions of back pain.

Authors:  Frank Leavitt; David C Garron; Walter W Whisler; Mitchell B Sheinkop
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1978-02       Impact factor: 6.961

10.  Semantic functional measurement of pain: integrating perception and language.

Authors:  R H Gracely; P J Wolskee
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1983-04       Impact factor: 6.961

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.