Literature DB >> 19665938

The clinical importance of changes in the 0 to 10 numeric rating scale for worst, least, and average pain intensity: analyses of data from clinical trials of duloxetine in pain disorders.

John T Farrar1, Yili L Pritchett, Michael Robinson, Apurva Prakash, Amy Chappell.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Data on 1,700 patients pooled from 5 randomized, placebo-controlled duloxetine studies (3 in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain and 2 in fibromyalgia) were analyzed to determine clinically important differences (CIDs) in the 0 to 10 Numeric Rating Scale-Pain Intensity (NRS-PI) for patient-reported "worst" and "least" pain intensity while validating the previously published level for "average" pain. The correspondence between the baseline-to-endpoint raw and percentage change in the NRS-PI for the worst, least, and average pain were compared to patients' perceived improvements at endpoint as measured by the 7-point Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scales. Stratification by baseline pain separated the raw but not the percent change scores. The PGI-I category of "much better" or above was our a priori definition of a CID. Cutoff points for the NRS-PI change scores were determined using a receiver operator curve analysis. A consistent relationship between the worst and average NRS-PI percent change and the PGI-I was demonstrated regardless of the study, pain type, age, sex, or treatment group with a reduction of approximately 34%. The least pain item CID was slightly higher at 41%. Raw change CID cutoff points were approximately -2, -2.5 and -3 for least, average, and worst pain respectively. PERSPECTIVE: We determined an anchor-based value for the change in the worst, least, and average pain intensity items of the Brief Pain Inventory that best represents a clinically important difference. Our findings support a standard definition of a clinically important difference in clinical trials of chronic-pain therapies. Copyright 2010 American Pain Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19665938     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2009.06.007

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


  71 in total

1.  Randomized control trial of topical clonidine for treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy.

Authors:  Claudia M Campbell; Mark S Kipnes; Bruce C Stouch; Kerrie L Brady; Margaret Kelly; William K Schmidt; Karin L Petersen; Michael C Rowbotham; James N Campbell
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2012-06-08       Impact factor: 6.961

2.  Are Modic changes prognostic for recovery in a cohort of patients with non-specific low back pain?

Authors:  Anne Keller; Eleanor Boyle; Thomas A Skog; J David Cassidy; Erik Bautz-Holter
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-08-12       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  A community pain service solution-focused pain management programme: delivery and preliminary outcome data.

Authors:  Rebecca Simm; Joanne Iddon; Chris Barker
Journal:  Br J Pain       Date:  2014-02

4.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI serves as a predictor of HIFU treatment outcome for uterine fibroids with hyperintensity in T2-weighted images.

Authors:  Wen-Peng Zhao; Jin-Yun Chen; Wen-Zhi Chen
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2015-11-18       Impact factor: 2.447

Review 5.  Evidence-based guideline: Treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy: report of the American Academy of Neurology, the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine, and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.

Authors:  V Bril; J England; G M Franklin; M Backonja; J Cohen; D Del Toro; E Feldman; D J Iverson; B Perkins; J W Russell; D Zochodne
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2011-04-11       Impact factor: 9.910

6.  Minimal Clinically Important Difference in the Physical, Emotional, and Total Symptom Distress Scores of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System.

Authors:  David Hui; Omar Shamieh; Carlos Eduardo Paiva; Odai Khamash; Pedro Emilio Perez-Cruz; Jung Hye Kwon; Mary Ann Muckaden; Minjeong Park; Joseph Arthur; Eduardo Bruera
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2015-10-19       Impact factor: 3.612

7.  Investigation of central pain processing in postoperative shoulder pain and disability.

Authors:  Carolina Valencia; Roger B Fillingim; Mark Bishop; Samuel S Wu; Thomas W Wright; Michael Moser; Kevin Farmer; Steven Z George
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 3.442

8.  Dependence of the minimal clinically important improvement on the baseline value is a consequence of floor and ceiling effects and not different expectations by patients.

Authors:  Michael M Ward; Lori C Guthrie; Maria Alba
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2014-02-17       Impact factor: 6.437

9.  Demand, Control and Support at Work Among Sick-Listed Patients with Neck or Back Pain: A Prospective Study.

Authors:  Kjersti Myhre; Bjørn Lau; Gunn Hege Marchand; Gunnar Leivseth; Erik Bautz-Holter; Cecilie Røe
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2016-06

10.  Personalized symptom goals and response in patients with advanced cancer.

Authors:  David Hui; Minjeong Park; Omar Shamieh; Carlos Eduardo Paiva; Pedro Emilio Perez-Cruz; Mary Ann Muckaden; Eduardo Bruera
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2016-03-11       Impact factor: 6.860

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.