Comparison of Measures of Pain Intensity During Sickle Cell Disease Vaso-Occlusive Episodes

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Mitchell R. Knisely , Huiman X. Barnhart , Stephanie O. Ibemere , Patricia Kavanagh , Judith A. Paice , John J. Strouse , Paula J. Tanabe
{"title":"Comparison of Measures of Pain Intensity During Sickle Cell Disease Vaso-Occlusive Episodes","authors":"Mitchell R. Knisely ,&nbsp;Huiman X. Barnhart ,&nbsp;Stephanie O. Ibemere ,&nbsp;Patricia Kavanagh ,&nbsp;Judith A. Paice ,&nbsp;John J. Strouse ,&nbsp;Paula J. Tanabe","doi":"10.1016/j.jpain.2024.104658","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We aimed to determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in pain severity and agreement between the visual analog scale (VAS) and the verbal numeric rating scale (NRS) in people with sickle cell disease (SCD) experiencing an acute vaso-occlusive episode in the emergency department. In the COMPARE-VOE trial (NCT03933397), participants were administered the VAS (0–100), NRS (0–100), and descriptor scale (<em>a lot better</em>, <em>a little better</em>, <em>same</em>, <em>a little worse</em>, <em>much worse</em>) every 30 minutes while in the emergency department. We analyzed data from 100 participants (mean age 30.2 years; 61% female). We calculated the mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between current and preceding scores when the participant reported <em>a little worse</em> or <em>a little better</em> pain for each scale (255 VAS and 150 NRS observations) to assess the MCID for the VAS and NRS. Pearson correlation and the Bland-Altman method were used to assess the agreement among 411 paired VAS and NRS observations. Our results indicated that the MCID for the VAS was 8.77 mm (95% CI: 7.43 mm, 10.83 mm) and the NRS was 8.29 (95% CI: 6.47, 11.60). The VAS and NRS scales had a correlation of .88 (<em>P</em> &lt; .001). The Bland-Altman method indicated a mean difference of −4.6 ± 1.96 and the 95% limits of agreement ranged from 20 to −29. Despite high correlation, there was considerable variability of agreement between the VAS and NRS scales, indicating that these scales are not interchangeable to assess pain during a vaso-occlusive event.</div></div><div><h3>Perspective</h3><div>The MCID in pain severity for individuals with a SCD vaso-occlusive episode using the VAS (8.77 mm) is lower than previously reported, and the MCID for NRS was 8.29. The agreement between the VAS and NRS was determined and the scales cannot be used interchangeably to measure SCD pain intensity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51095,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain","volume":"25 12","pages":"Article 104658"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1526590024006138","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We aimed to determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in pain severity and agreement between the visual analog scale (VAS) and the verbal numeric rating scale (NRS) in people with sickle cell disease (SCD) experiencing an acute vaso-occlusive episode in the emergency department. In the COMPARE-VOE trial (NCT03933397), participants were administered the VAS (0–100), NRS (0–100), and descriptor scale (a lot better, a little better, same, a little worse, much worse) every 30 minutes while in the emergency department. We analyzed data from 100 participants (mean age 30.2 years; 61% female). We calculated the mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between current and preceding scores when the participant reported a little worse or a little better pain for each scale (255 VAS and 150 NRS observations) to assess the MCID for the VAS and NRS. Pearson correlation and the Bland-Altman method were used to assess the agreement among 411 paired VAS and NRS observations. Our results indicated that the MCID for the VAS was 8.77 mm (95% CI: 7.43 mm, 10.83 mm) and the NRS was 8.29 (95% CI: 6.47, 11.60). The VAS and NRS scales had a correlation of .88 (P < .001). The Bland-Altman method indicated a mean difference of −4.6 ± 1.96 and the 95% limits of agreement ranged from 20 to −29. Despite high correlation, there was considerable variability of agreement between the VAS and NRS scales, indicating that these scales are not interchangeable to assess pain during a vaso-occlusive event.

Perspective

The MCID in pain severity for individuals with a SCD vaso-occlusive episode using the VAS (8.77 mm) is lower than previously reported, and the MCID for NRS was 8.29. The agreement between the VAS and NRS was determined and the scales cannot be used interchangeably to measure SCD pain intensity.
镰状细胞病血管闭塞症发作时疼痛强度测量方法的比较
我们旨在确定镰状细胞病患者在急诊科(ED)急性血管闭塞发作时疼痛严重程度的最小临床重要差异(MCID)以及视觉模拟量表(VAS)和口头数字评分量表(NRS)之间的一致性。在 COMPARE-VOE 试验(NCT03933397)中,参与者在急诊室每 30 分钟接受一次 VAS(0-100)、NRS(0-100)和描述量表(好很多、好一点、一样、差一点、差很多)测试。我们分析了 100 名参与者(平均年龄 30.2 岁;61% 为女性)的数据。我们计算了当参与者报告每种量表(255 次 VAS 和 150 次 NRS 观察)的疼痛稍差或稍好时,当前评分与之前评分之间的平均差和 95% 置信区间 (CI),以评估 VAS 和 NRS 的 MCID。皮尔逊相关法和布兰德-阿尔特曼法用于评估 411 个配对 VAS 和 NRS 观察结果之间的一致性。结果表明,VAS 的 MCID 为 8.77 毫米(95% CI:7.43 毫米,10.83 毫米),NRS 为 8.29(95% CI:6.47,11.60)。VAS 和 NRS 量表的相关性为 0.88(P < 0.001)。布兰德-阿尔特曼(Bland Altmann)显示平均差异为-4.6 ±1.96,95%的一致性范围为20至-29。尽管相关性很高,但 VAS 量表和 NRS 量表之间的一致性差异很大,这表明在评估血管闭塞事件中的疼痛时,这些量表不能互换。视角:使用 VAS(8.77 毫米)评估镰状细胞病患者发生 VOE 时疼痛严重程度的平均 MCID 低于之前的报告,而 NRS 的 MCID 为(8.29)。我们评估了 VAS 和 NRS 之间的一致性,并确定这两种量表不能互换使用来测量 SCD 疼痛强度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Pain
Journal of Pain 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
7.50%
发文量
441
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Pain publishes original articles related to all aspects of pain, including clinical and basic research, patient care, education, and health policy. Articles selected for publication in the Journal are most commonly reports of original clinical research or reports of original basic research. In addition, invited critical reviews, including meta analyses of drugs for pain management, invited commentaries on reviews, and exceptional case studies are published in the Journal. The mission of the Journal is to improve the care of patients in pain by providing a forum for clinical researchers, basic scientists, clinicians, and other health professionals to publish original research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信