Literature DB >> 9835471

Does the clinically significant difference in visual analog scale pain scores vary with gender, age, or cause of pain?

A M Kelly1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the minimum clinically significant difference in visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores for acute pain in the ED setting and to determine whether this difference varies with gender, age, or cause of pain.
METHODS: A prospective, descriptive study of 152 adult patients presenting to the ED with acute pain. At presentation and at 20-minute intervals to a maximum of three measurements, patients marked the level of their pain on a 100-mm, nonhatched VAS. At each follow-up they also gave a verbal rating of their pain as "a lot better," "much the same," "a little worse," or "much worse." The minimum clinically significant difference in VAS pain scores was defined as the mean difference between current and preceding scores when pain was reported as a little worse or a little better. Data were compared based on gender, age more than or less than 50 years, and traumatic vs nontraumatic causes of pain.
RESULTS: The minimum clinically significant difference in VAS pain scores is 9 mm (95% CI, 6 to 13 mm). There is no statistically significant difference between the minimum clinically significant differences in VAS pain scores based on gender (p=0.172), age (p=0.782), or cause of pain (p=0.84).
CONCLUSIONS: The minimum clinically significant difference in VAS pain scores was found to be 9 mm. Differences of less than this amount, even if statistically significant, are unlikely to be of clinical significance. No significant difference in minimum significant VAS scores was found between gender, age, and cause-of-pain groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9835471     DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1998.tb02667.x

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


  107 in total

1.  The minimum clinically significant difference in visual analogue scale pain score does not differ with severity of pain.

Authors:  A M Kelly
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 2.740

2.  Evaluation of Patient Perceptions After Vestibuloplasty Procedure: A Comparison of Diode Laser and Scalpel Techniques.

Authors:  Butchibabu Kalakonda; Sana Farista; Pradeep Koppolu; Kusai Baroudi; Udaykiran Uppada; Ashank Mishra; Abhishek Savarimath; Amara Swapna Lingam
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-05-01

Review 3.  Pain assessment.

Authors:  Mathias Haefeli; Achim Elfering
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-12-01       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Entonox as an analgesic agent during panretinal photocoagulation.

Authors:  H L Cook; R S B Newsom; E Mensah; M Saeed; D James; T J Ffytche
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 4.638

5.  Comparison of postoperative pain at umbilical wound after conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy between transumbilical and infraumbilical incisions: a randomized control trial.

Authors:  Boonying Siribumrungwong; Trirat Chunsirisub; Palin Limpavitayaporn; Assanee Tongyoo; Ekkapak Sriussadaporn; Chatchai Mingmalairak; Weerayut Thowprasert; Ammarin Thakkinstian
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Minimal Important Difference (MID) of two commonly used outcome measures for foot problems.

Authors:  Karl B Landorf; Joel A Radford; Susie Hudson
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2010-05-14       Impact factor: 2.303

7.  Cataract surgery under topical anesthesia: Gender-based study of pain experience.

Authors:  Sanjiv Kumar Gupta; Ajay Kumar; Swati Agarwal
Journal:  Oman J Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-09

8.  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

9.  Cervical collar or physiotherapy versus wait and see policy for recent onset cervical radiculopathy: randomised trial.

Authors:  Barbara Kuijper; Jos Th J Tans; Anita Beelen; Frans Nollet; Marianne de Visser
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2009-10-07

10.  Effect of Functional Capacity Evaluation information on the judgment of physicians about physical work ability in the context of disability claims.

Authors:  Haije Wind; Vincent Gouttebarge; P Paul F M Kuijer; Judith K Sluiter; Monique H W Frings-Dresen
Journal:  Int Arch Occup Environ Health       Date:  2009-05-21       Impact factor: 3.015

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.