Measuring pain intensity in categories through a novel electronic device during experimental cold-induced pain.

IF 1.9 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Scandinavian Journal of Pain Pub Date : 2025-09-02 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1515/sjpain-2025-0018
Elisabeth Ørskov Rotevatn, Mette Engan, Emilie Stensaker, Karl Ove Hufthammer, Lars Jørgen Rygh
{"title":"Measuring pain intensity in categories through a novel electronic device during experimental cold-induced pain.","authors":"Elisabeth Ørskov Rotevatn, Mette Engan, Emilie Stensaker, Karl Ove Hufthammer, Lars Jørgen Rygh","doi":"10.1515/sjpain-2025-0018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Pain assessment is challenging given its subjective nature, and existing assessment tools have limitations, especially for patients having problems with verbal communication. A prior study evaluated the Grasp, a handheld device for assessing pain intensity through squeezing, showing a moderate association with the numeric rating scale (NRS). This study examined an improved version of the Grasp with instant visual feedback through color-coded categories and compared it to NRS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Healthy adults underwent two consecutive cold pressor tests (CPTs), reporting pain intensity via NRS or Grasp with colour-coded feedback. Two additional CPTs assessed the association of repeated measurements with both instruments. The Grasp was calibrated to individual strength before CPTs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-six subjects completed all tests. Pain intensity association between Grasp and NRS was moderate with a mean Kendall's <i>τ</i>-<i>b</i> coefficient (<i>τ</i>-<i>b</i>) of 0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35-0.56. Repeated Grasp measurements showed a moderate association (<i>τ</i>-<i>b</i> = 0.37, 95% CI 0.27-0.48), while repeated NRS measurements had a stronger association (<i>τ</i>-<i>b</i> = 0.71, 95% CI 0.64-0.78). After adjusting Grasp to individual squeeze strength (resulting in a 0.0-1.0 scale), a simple equation relating NRS value and mean Grasp value was identified: Grasp = 0.091 × NRS. Grouping reports into mild, moderate, and severe pain resulted in agreement proportions across two CPTs of 69% for Grasp and 79% for NRS.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The moderately high agreement proportions for pain intensity categories suggest that the Grasp method with colour-coded feedback may be useful for categorical pain intensity assessment, especially in settings where conventional tools (i.e., NRS) are inconvenient or not feasible.</p>","PeriodicalId":47407,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Pain","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/sjpain-2025-0018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Pain assessment is challenging given its subjective nature, and existing assessment tools have limitations, especially for patients having problems with verbal communication. A prior study evaluated the Grasp, a handheld device for assessing pain intensity through squeezing, showing a moderate association with the numeric rating scale (NRS). This study examined an improved version of the Grasp with instant visual feedback through color-coded categories and compared it to NRS.

Methods: Healthy adults underwent two consecutive cold pressor tests (CPTs), reporting pain intensity via NRS or Grasp with colour-coded feedback. Two additional CPTs assessed the association of repeated measurements with both instruments. The Grasp was calibrated to individual strength before CPTs.

Results: Forty-six subjects completed all tests. Pain intensity association between Grasp and NRS was moderate with a mean Kendall's τ-b coefficient (τ-b) of 0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35-0.56. Repeated Grasp measurements showed a moderate association (τ-b = 0.37, 95% CI 0.27-0.48), while repeated NRS measurements had a stronger association (τ-b = 0.71, 95% CI 0.64-0.78). After adjusting Grasp to individual squeeze strength (resulting in a 0.0-1.0 scale), a simple equation relating NRS value and mean Grasp value was identified: Grasp = 0.091 × NRS. Grouping reports into mild, moderate, and severe pain resulted in agreement proportions across two CPTs of 69% for Grasp and 79% for NRS.

Conclusions: The moderately high agreement proportions for pain intensity categories suggest that the Grasp method with colour-coded feedback may be useful for categorical pain intensity assessment, especially in settings where conventional tools (i.e., NRS) are inconvenient or not feasible.

用一种新型的电子装置测量实验性冷致疼痛的疼痛强度。
目的:疼痛评估具有主观性,现有评估工具存在局限性,特别是对于有语言交流问题的患者。一项先前的研究评估了Grasp,一种通过挤压来评估疼痛强度的手持设备,显示出与数字评定量表(NRS)的适度关联。本研究通过颜色编码的分类检查了具有即时视觉反馈的抓握的改进版本,并将其与NRS进行了比较。方法:健康成人接受两次连续的冷压试验(CPTs),通过NRS或grip报告疼痛强度,并进行颜色编码反馈。另外两项CPTs评估了两种仪器重复测量的相关性。在CPTs之前,Grasp被校准为个人力量。结果:46名受试者完成了所有测试。握力与NRS之间的疼痛强度相关性为中等,平均肯德尔τ-b系数(τ-b)为0.45,95%可信区间(CI)为0.35-0.56。重复的Grasp测量结果显示中度相关性(τ-b = 0.37, 95% CI 0.27-0.48),而重复的NRS测量结果具有较强的相关性(τ-b = 0.71, 95% CI 0.64-0.78)。将Grasp调整为个体挤压强度(产生0.0-1.0的量表)后,确定了NRS值与平均Grasp值之间的简单方程:Grasp = 0.091 × NRS。将报告分为轻度、中度和重度疼痛,两个cpt的一致性比例在Grasp组为69%,在NRS组为79%。结论:对疼痛强度类别的中等高的一致性比例表明,具有颜色编码反馈的Grasp方法可能对分类疼痛强度评估有用,特别是在传统工具(即NRS)不方便或不可行的情况下。
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
Scandinavian Journal of Pain
Scandinavian Journal of Pain CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
73
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信