Feeling better versus feeling good: interpreting pain relief using minimal clinically important differences and patient acceptable symptom states for patients who underwent lung cancer surgery

Author:

Kang Dan1,Zhang Ruoyi1,Xu Wei1,Dai Wei2,Su Xueyao1,Huang Yanyan1,Zhang Jingyu1,Chen Jiaojiao1,Xiang Rumei1,Shi Qiuling1

Affiliation:

1. Chongqing Medical University

2. Sichuan Cancer Hospital

Abstract

Abstract Purpose Selection of thresholds for pain relief remains empirical and controversial. This study aimed to demonstrate the performance of two mostly used concepts, MCID and PASS, in interpreting perioperative recovery in patients undergoing VATS for lung cancer. Methods Patients undergoing VATS were asked to report their pain score daily on a 0–10 scale using PSA-Lung, a validated PRO tool for perioperative symptom measurement. If patients reported a pain score above 3 on the first day post-surgery, pain relief were defined either by MCID (feeling better) or PASS (feeling good) Factors associated with pain relief defined by those two thresholds were analyzed via cox regression models. Median days of pain relief were illustrated using K-M curves. Results Among 881 patients with POD1 pain ≥ 4, 805(91.37%) achieved ‘feeling better', and 775 (87.97%)achieved 'feeling good'(P < 0.05). Cox regression analysis showed that CCI scores ([HR]1.234,95%CI 1.022–1.490, P < 0.05) were associated with "feeling better" and single-port thoracoscopic surgery ([HR]1.192,95%CI1.017-1.397, P < 0.05) and no postoperative complications ([HR] 1.316, 95% CI 1.123–1.543) were associated with "feeling good". Using the log-rank test, we identified that patients with better CCI scores needed 4 days (95% CI = 4–5) to "feel better" whereas those with lower CCI scores needed 5 (95%CI = 3–7). Patients undergoing single-port thoracoscopic surgery required 6 days (95% CI = 5–6) to achieve a "feeling good" state compared to 7 days(95%CI = 6–8)for patients undergoing multi-port thoracoscopic surgery (all P < 0.05). Conclusion Responders, defined using the MCID and PASS, had similar rates of postoperative pain relief. However, the low agreement between responders and the unique predictors of responders suggests distinct underlying mechanisms and diverse potential applications of these two therapies.

Publisher

Research Square Platform LLC

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