Literature DB >> 8808375

The minimum clinically important difference in physician-assigned visual analog pain scores.

K H Todd1, J P Funk.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the minimum clinically important difference in physician-assigned visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores.
METHODS: Physicians attending emergency medicine didactic conferences were enrolled in this descriptive study. The subjects sequentially reviewed 11 written scenarios describing patients in moderate to severe pain. The subjects rated their perceptions of each patient's pain on a 100-mm VAS, then contrasted this pain with that of the previous patient scenario. For these contrasts, the subjects chose one of five responses: "much less," "a little less," "about the same," "a little more," or "much more" pain. The minimum clinically important difference was defined as the difference between scores for scenario pairs in which one patient's pain was rated "a little less" or "a little more" severe.
RESULTS: There were 230 comparisons by 23 health professionals. Of these, 64 were judged "a little less," and 56 "a little more," painful. These 120 comparisons, with their pain score differences, were used to determine the minimum clinically important difference. Pain judged to be "a little less" or "a little more" severe was associated with a mean difference in VAS scores of 18 mm (95% CI 16-20 mm), corresponding to a decrement of 23% (95% CI 20-26%) from the more painful scenario.
CONCLUSIONS: Pain research outcomes involving a < 18-mm difference, or a 23% decrement in physician-assigned VAS pain scores, although statistically significant, may have little clinical importance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8808375     DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1996.tb03402.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Emerg Med        ISSN: 1069-6563            Impact factor:   3.451


  48 in total

Review 1.  [Evidence-based evaluation of study results of symptomatic glucosamine therapy].

Authors:  S Reiter
Journal:  Z Rheumatol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 1.372

2.  A comparison of the scaling properties of the English, Spanish, French, and Chinese EQ-5D descriptive systems.

Authors:  Nan Luo; Minghui Li; Julie Chevalier; Andrew Lloyd; Michael Herdman
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-12-25       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Complications in TLIF spondylodesis-do they influence the outcome for patients? A prospective two-center study.

Authors:  Philipp Poppenborg; Ulf Liljenqvist; Georg Gosheger; Albert Schulze Boevingloh; Lukas Lampe; Sebastian Schmeil; Tobias L Schulte; Tobias Lange
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2020-12-22       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Efficacy and safety of sublingual fentanyl orally disintegrating tablet at doses determined by titration for the treatment of breakthrough pain in Japanese cancer patients: a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase III trial.

Authors:  Naohito Shimoyama; Ikuo Gomyo; Nobuyuki Katakami; Masakuni Okada; Nobuyuki Yukitoshi; Eri Ohta; Megumi Shimoyama
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  The effect of statins on muscle symptoms in primary care: the StatinWISE series of 200 N-of-1 RCTs.

Authors:  Emily Herrett; Elizabeth Williamson; Kieran Brack; Alexander Perkins; Andrew Thayne; Haleema Shakur-Still; Ian Roberts; Danielle Prowse; Danielle Beaumont; Zahra Jamal; Ben Goldacre; Tjeerd van Staa; Thomas M MacDonald; Jane Armitage; Michael Moore; Maurice Hoffman; Liam Smeeth
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2021-03       Impact factor: 4.014

6.  Topical lidocaine adrenaline tetracaine (LAT gel) versus injectable buffered lidocaine for local anesthesia in laceration repair.

Authors:  A A Ernst; E Marvez-Valls; T G Nick; T Mills; L Minvielle; D Houry
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1997-08

Review 7.  The challenges of assessing osteoarthritis and postoperative pain in dogs.

Authors:  Michele Sharkey
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2013-03-02       Impact factor: 4.009

8.  IMPROVE trial: a randomized controlled trial of patient-controlled analgesia for sickle cell painful episodes: rationale, design challenges, initial experience, and recommendations for future studies.

Authors:  Carlton D Dampier; Wally R Smith; Carrie G Wager; Hae-Young Kim; Margaret C Bell; Scott T Miller; Debra L Weiner; Caterina P Minniti; Lakshmanan Krishnamurti; Kenneth I Ataga; James R Eckman; Lewis L Hsu; Donna McClish; Sonja M McKinlay; Robert Molokie; Ifeyinwa Osunkwo; Kim Smith-Whitley; Marilyn J Telen
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.486

9.  A Randomized, Double-Dummy, Emergency Department-Based Study of Greater Occipital Nerve Block With Bupivacaine vs Intravenous Metoclopramide for Treatment of Migraine.

Authors:  Benjamin W Friedman; Eddie Irizarry; Andrew Williams; Clemencia Solorzano; Eleftheria Zias; Matthew S Robbins; Melissa A Harrilal; Michael Del Valle; Polly E Bijur; E John Gallagher
Journal:  Headache       Date:  2020-09-27       Impact factor: 5.887

10.  Effect of topical alkane vapocoolant spray on pain with intravenous cannulation in patients in emergency departments: randomised double blind placebo controlled trial.

Authors:  Ramzi Hijazi; David Taylor; Joanna Richardson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2009-02-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.