Literature DB >> 7892026

Extent measurement in localised low-back pain: a comparison of four methods.

Peter Bryner1.   

Abstract

Seventeen drawings of localised low-back pain were analysed by two assessors using 4 systems. Three were grid-based systems and one was by computer. The mean area or 'extent' was calculated to be 7.7%, 4.7%, 3.6% and 2.3% of the body outline using 45, 200, 560 and 61,102 section analyses, respectively. The computer-assisted method provided a significantly lower estimate of pain extent than the grid-based assessments as expected. Analysis of variance showed that the method of analysis provided greater source of variation than raters (P < 0.0001). Inter-rater reliability was high using all 4 systems calculated using intraclass correlation and the kappa statistic. Correlation coefficients of extent between the systems varied from 0.46 to 0.94. Correlation was highest between systems of adjacent magnitude of sections. It is concluded that grid-based assessment of small areas overestimates the actual area of pain and this may account for the lack of sensitivity to change in clinical status.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7892026     DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(94)90081-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pain        ISSN: 0304-3959            Impact factor:   6.961


  11 in total

1.  Reproducibility of pain manikins: a comparison of paper versus online questionnaires.

Authors:  Gareth T Jones; Ramona Kyabaggu; Debbi Marais; Gary J Macfarlane
Journal:  Br J Pain       Date:  2013-08

2.  Pain location and functioning in persons with spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Jordi Miró; Kevin J Gertz; Gregory T Carter; Mark P Jensen
Journal:  PM R       Date:  2014-01-18       Impact factor: 2.298

3.  Predicting Opioid Use, Increased Health Care Utilization and High Costs for Musculoskeletal Pain: What Factors Mediate Pain Intensity and Disability?

Authors:  Trevor A Lentz; Daniel I Rhon; Steven Z George
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2019-06-13       Impact factor: 5.820

4.  Psychometric Study of the Pain Drawing.

Authors:  Lisa H Trahan; Emily Cox-Martin; Carrie E Johnson; Patrick M Dougherty; Jun Yu; Lei Feng; Christina Cook; Diane M Novy
Journal:  J Appl Biobehav Res       Date:  2017-04-07

5.  Computer-aided surface estimation of pain drawings - intra- and inter-rater reliability.

Authors:  Ann L Persson; Sofia Garametsos; Jonna Pedersen
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2011-05-15       Impact factor: 3.133

6.  The course of pain drawings during a 10-week treatment period in patients with acute and sub-acute low back pain.

Authors:  Marie Grunnesjö; Johan Bogefeldt; Stefan Blomberg; Heléne Delaney; Kurt Svärdsudd
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2006-08-11       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  From Paper to Digital Applications of the Pain Drawing: Systematic Review of Methodological Milestones.

Authors:  Nour Shaballout; Till-Ansgar Neubert; Shellie Boudreau; Florian Beissner
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2019-09-05       Impact factor: 4.773

8.  Profiling the Location and Extent of Musicians' Pain Using Digital Pain Drawings.

Authors:  Cinzia Cruder; Deborah Falla; Francesca Mangili; Laura Azzimonti; Liliana S Araújo; Aaron Williamon; Marco Barbero
Journal:  Pain Pract       Date:  2017-05-28       Impact factor: 3.183

9.  Computerized assessment of pain drawing area: A pilot study.

Authors:  Anna Wenngren; Britt-Marie Stålnacke
Journal:  Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat       Date:  2009-08-20       Impact factor: 2.570

10.  Digital manikins to self-report pain on a smartphone: A systematic review of mobile apps.

Authors:  Syed Mustafa Ali; Wei J Lau; John McBeth; William G Dixon; Sabine N van der Veer
Journal:  Eur J Pain       Date:  2020-11-13       Impact factor: 3.931

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.