The level of agreement between the numerical rating scale and visual analogue scale for assessing pain intensity in adults with chronic pain

Author:

Goudman L.12ORCID,Pilitsis J. G.3,Billet B.14ORCID,De Vos R.4,Hanssens K.4,Billot M.5ORCID,Roulaud M.5ORCID,Rigoard P.56ORCID,Moens M.17ORCID

Affiliation:

1. STIMULUS research group Vrije Universiteit Brussel Brussels Belgium

2. Research Foundation—Flanders (FWO) Brussels Belgium

3. Florida Atlantic University Boca Raton FL USA

4. Pain Clinic AZ Delta Roeselare Belgium

5. PRISMATICS Lab Poitiers University Hospital Poitiers France

6. Department of Spine Surgery and Neuromodulation Poitiers University Hospital Poitiers France

7. Departments of Neurosurgery and Radiology Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel Brussels Belgium

Abstract

SummaryThe numerical rating scale and visual analogue scale are used to quantify pain intensity. However, it has not yet been explored whether these scores are interchangeable in adults with chronic pain. Data from the prospective multicentre cross‐sectional INTERVAL study were used to evaluate the one‐dimensionality and agreement between numerical rating scale scores and visual analogue scale scores in adults with chronic pain. Pain intensity scores using the numerical rating scale and visual analogue scale were provided by 366 patients with chronic pain for current, average, minimal and maximal pain. To evaluate whether pain intensity scales are completed in accordance with each other, the proportion of patients who satisfied the following condition was calculated: minimal pain intensity ≤ maximal pain intensity. A factor analysis confirmed the one‐dimensionality of the pain measures. A significant difference was found between numerical rating scale and visual analogue scale scores for average, current, minimum and maximum pain. Intra‐class correlation coefficient estimates ranged from 0.739 to 0.858 and all measures failed to show sufficient and acceptable agreement at the 95% level. The strength of agreement between pain severity categories was classified as ‘moderate’ for average and minimal pain and ‘substantial’ for current and maximal pain. The proportion of patients who scored minimal pain ≤ maximal pain was 97.5% for the numerical rating scale and 89.5% for the visual analogue scale. This study failed to show an acceptable agreement between the numerical rating scale and visual analogue scale when pain intensity was rated by adults with chronic pain, despite showing both scales measure the same information.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

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