How Should We Assess Pain: Do Patients Prefer a Quantitative or Qualitative Scale? A Study of Patient Preferences

Author:

Firdous Shagufta1,Berger Andrea1,Jehangir Waqas1,Fernandez Carlos1,Behm Bertrand1,Mehta Zankhana Y.1,Reddy Akhila2,Davis Mellar1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, PA, USA

2. MD Anderson Cancer Institute, Houston, TX, USA

Abstract

Background: Pain perception is a subjective experience and is influenced by a variety of factors. Pain assessment tools, included the numeric pain rating scale (NRS) and the visual analog scale (VAS). A VAS qualitative (VASQ) scale asks patients their current pain level along a continuum of “Good Day,” “Average Day,” or “Bad Day.” We had patients complete both scales and asked them their preference and reason for their choice. Methods: We identified patients 18 years of age and older, seen by Palliative medicine at Geisinger, who had cancer-associated pain of at least one-month duration. Patients filled out the study questionnaire composed of 2 questions. Characteristics of patients who preferred the VASQ were compared to those who preferred the NRS using a 2-sample t tests or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and Pearson χ2 or Fisher exact tests. The relationship between the NRS and the VASQ used the Pearson correlation coefficient. Results: One hundred forty-six patients completed the questionnaire, 52.1% were female; 63.7% preferred the NRS, 31.5% preferred the VASQ. Patients who preferred the NRS reported a higher NRS rating than patients who preferred the VASQ (mean NRS rating of 6.0 compared to 5.3) but the difference was not statistically significant ( P = .1531). Visual analog scale qualitative ratings were higher among patients who preferred the NRS, but the difference was not statistically different (mean rating of 5.2 vs 4.8, P = .3669). Conclusion: Patients preferred the NRS over VASQ for pain assessment. Patients tend to rate their pain at a higher level when using NRS compared to VASQ.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3