低估了有跌倒风险的老年人的疼痛程度

IF 2.2 Q3 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Aging Medicine Pub Date : 2024-01-26 DOI:10.1002/agm2.12283
Mustafa Atee
{"title":"低估了有跌倒风险的老年人的疼痛程度","authors":"Mustafa Atee","doi":"10.1002/agm2.12283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>I have read with great interest the Xiao et al. study examining retrospectively the incidence of falls and related factors in outpatient and inpatient elderly sample (<i>n</i> = 451) aged 65 years and above.<span><sup>1</sup></span> Key factors considered in the study were pain and other comorbidities, such as frailty and osteoarthritis.<span><sup>1</sup></span> Although the findings have great merits and add to the body of literature, there are some limitations that should have been addressed or reported in the study.</p><p>Whereas Xiao et al. data indicate that the association between pain and fall is not statistically significant, this finding was not explicitly presented in the article. More importantly, it is astounding that the study found pain had no impact on the incidence of falls, despite the clear link between pain and falls in older adults in the literature. For example, a 2014 systematic review and meta-analysis by Stubbs et al.<span><sup>2</sup></span> found that pain was associated with a higher risk of falls, where half (50.5%) of older adults with pain reported at least one fall over a 12-month period. A more recent systematic review found that multisite pain is associated with an increased risk of future falls risk in community-dwelling older people.<span><sup>3</sup></span> Further, it is well recognized that chronic pain is highly prevalent and disabling in older adults with and without dementia, but it is often an underestimated clinical problem in this population.<span><sup>4</sup></span> Given that the data in the Xiao et al. study did not involve the pathological state of “chronic pain,” and the latter differs from the concept of pain within 4 weeks, the authors cannot be assertive in concluding that pain had no impact on the incidence of falls. Clearly, the status, duration, and type of pain (e.g., acute nociceptive pain vs. persistent pain) may have influenced these findings and, therefore, the definition of pain should have been further clarified or operationalized in the Xiao et al. study. Moreover, the limitations of the study should have been mentioned that the findings were only applicable to this operational definition of pain.</p><p>The sample in the Xiao et al. study included older adults with mild and moderate dementia, whose pain reporting in some may be unreliable or inadequate. Further, the Mini-Mental State Examination instrument was listed in the methodology, but cognition scores were not reported for the sample. Thus, how did the authors ascertain intact cognition and communication skills in the sample? That is, how was the self-reporting capacity of the sample confirmed? If not, why was this not reported in the limitations?</p><p>Given that no difference in pain was detected between the fall and nonfall groups by the digital pain drawings instrument and this instrument was not validated in people with dementia, these issues raise the question whether the instrument was sensitive enough to detect any differences in pain between the two groups. This finding is also counterintuitive in the presence of significant differences between the groups in relation to the reduced mobility and the ability of performing daily living activities, as both of these are strongly associated with the presence of pain in older adults.<span><sup>5</sup></span> Follow-up studies can carry out more in-depth research on the tools and methods of pain assessment and the time window of pain assessment in older adults with risk of falls.</p><p>Lastly, recall and documentation biases were not acknowledged in the limitation section of this retrospective study.</p><p>Dr Mustafa Atee is the sole author of this publication.</p><p>The author received no funding from an external source in relation to this letter.</p><p>The author is one of the coinventors of the original PainChek<sup>®</sup> instrument (branded ePAT at the time), which was acquired and subsequently commercialized by PainChek Ltd. Dr Atee is a shareholder of PainChek Ltd. He previously held the position of a Senior Research Scientist (October 2018–May 2020) at PainChek Ltd, and is currently serving the position of Research and Practice Lead (Team Leader) at The Dementia Centre, HammondCare. Dr Atee coauthored a patent titled “A pain assessment method and system; PCT/AU2015/000501” which was assigned to PainChek Ltd and who have, to date, received granted patents in China, Japan, and the United States. The PainChek<sup>®</sup> instrument was not mentioned nor cited in this letter.</p>","PeriodicalId":32862,"journal":{"name":"Aging Medicine","volume":"7 1","pages":"136-137"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/agm2.12283","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pain is underestimated in older adults with risk of falls\",\"authors\":\"Mustafa Atee\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/agm2.12283\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>I have read with great interest the Xiao et al. study examining retrospectively the incidence of falls and related factors in outpatient and inpatient elderly sample (<i>n</i> = 451) aged 65 years and above.<span><sup>1</sup></span> Key factors considered in the study were pain and other comorbidities, such as frailty and osteoarthritis.<span><sup>1</sup></span> Although the findings have great merits and add to the body of literature, there are some limitations that should have been addressed or reported in the study.</p><p>Whereas Xiao et al. data indicate that the association between pain and fall is not statistically significant, this finding was not explicitly presented in the article. More importantly, it is astounding that the study found pain had no impact on the incidence of falls, despite the clear link between pain and falls in older adults in the literature. For example, a 2014 systematic review and meta-analysis by Stubbs et al.<span><sup>2</sup></span> found that pain was associated with a higher risk of falls, where half (50.5%) of older adults with pain reported at least one fall over a 12-month period. A more recent systematic review found that multisite pain is associated with an increased risk of future falls risk in community-dwelling older people.<span><sup>3</sup></span> Further, it is well recognized that chronic pain is highly prevalent and disabling in older adults with and without dementia, but it is often an underestimated clinical problem in this population.<span><sup>4</sup></span> Given that the data in the Xiao et al. study did not involve the pathological state of “chronic pain,” and the latter differs from the concept of pain within 4 weeks, the authors cannot be assertive in concluding that pain had no impact on the incidence of falls. Clearly, the status, duration, and type of pain (e.g., acute nociceptive pain vs. persistent pain) may have influenced these findings and, therefore, the definition of pain should have been further clarified or operationalized in the Xiao et al. study. Moreover, the limitations of the study should have been mentioned that the findings were only applicable to this operational definition of pain.</p><p>The sample in the Xiao et al. study included older adults with mild and moderate dementia, whose pain reporting in some may be unreliable or inadequate. Further, the Mini-Mental State Examination instrument was listed in the methodology, but cognition scores were not reported for the sample. Thus, how did the authors ascertain intact cognition and communication skills in the sample? That is, how was the self-reporting capacity of the sample confirmed? If not, why was this not reported in the limitations?</p><p>Given that no difference in pain was detected between the fall and nonfall groups by the digital pain drawings instrument and this instrument was not validated in people with dementia, these issues raise the question whether the instrument was sensitive enough to detect any differences in pain between the two groups. This finding is also counterintuitive in the presence of significant differences between the groups in relation to the reduced mobility and the ability of performing daily living activities, as both of these are strongly associated with the presence of pain in older adults.<span><sup>5</sup></span> Follow-up studies can carry out more in-depth research on the tools and methods of pain assessment and the time window of pain assessment in older adults with risk of falls.</p><p>Lastly, recall and documentation biases were not acknowledged in the limitation section of this retrospective study.</p><p>Dr Mustafa Atee is the sole author of this publication.</p><p>The author received no funding from an external source in relation to this letter.</p><p>The author is one of the coinventors of the original PainChek<sup>®</sup> instrument (branded ePAT at the time), which was acquired and subsequently commercialized by PainChek Ltd. Dr Atee is a shareholder of PainChek Ltd. He previously held the position of a Senior Research Scientist (October 2018–May 2020) at PainChek Ltd, and is currently serving the position of Research and Practice Lead (Team Leader) at The Dementia Centre, HammondCare. Dr Atee coauthored a patent titled “A pain assessment method and system; PCT/AU2015/000501” which was assigned to PainChek Ltd and who have, to date, received granted patents in China, Japan, and the United States. The PainChek<sup>®</sup> instrument was not mentioned nor cited in this letter.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":32862,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aging Medicine\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"136-137\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/agm2.12283\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aging Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/agm2.12283\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aging Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/agm2.12283","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我怀着极大的兴趣阅读了肖等人的研究报告,该报告回顾性地研究了 65 岁及以上老年人门诊和住院样本(n = 451)的跌倒发生率及相关因素。虽然研究结果有很大的价值,并为文献库增添了新的内容,但也存在一些局限性,本应在研究中加以解决或报告。肖等人的数据表明,疼痛与跌倒之间的关系在统计学上并不显著,但这一结果并未在文章中明确提出。更重要的是,该研究发现疼痛对跌倒发生率没有影响,这令人震惊,尽管在文献中疼痛与老年人跌倒之间存在明确的联系。例如,Stubbs 等人在 2014 年进行的一项系统综述和荟萃分析2 发现,疼痛与较高的跌倒风险有关,半数(50.5%)有疼痛的老年人在 12 个月内至少跌倒过一次。3 此外,慢性疼痛在患有或不患有痴呆症的老年人中发病率高且致残率高,这一点已得到公认,但在这一人群中,慢性疼痛往往是一个被低估的临床问题。鉴于肖等人的研究数据不涉及 "慢性疼痛 "的病理状态,而后者又不同于 4 周内疼痛的概念,因此作者不能断言疼痛对跌倒发生率没有影响。显然,疼痛的状态、持续时间和类型(如急性痛觉疼痛与持续性疼痛)可能会影响这些研究结果,因此,肖等人的研究应该进一步明确疼痛的定义或使其可操作化。肖等人的研究样本包括患有轻度和中度痴呆症的老年人,其中一些人的疼痛报告可能不可靠或不充分。此外,研究方法中列出了迷你精神状态检查工具,但并未报告样本的认知评分。因此,作者是如何确定样本的认知和交流能力完好无损的呢?也就是说,如何确认样本的自我报告能力?如果没有,为什么没有在局限性中报告?鉴于数字疼痛绘图工具没有检测出跌倒组和非跌倒组之间的疼痛差异,而且该工具没有在痴呆症患者中得到验证,这些问题提出了一个问题,即该工具是否足够灵敏,能够检测出两组之间的疼痛差异。此外,由于两组在活动能力和日常生活能力方面存在显著差异,这一结果也有悖常理,因为这两项因素都与老年人的疼痛密切相关。5 后续研究可以对有跌倒风险的老年人的疼痛评估工具和方法以及疼痛评估的时间窗口进行更深入的研究。最后,在这项回顾性研究的局限性部分,没有考虑到回忆和记录偏差。作者是最初的PainChek®仪器(当时的品牌为ePAT)的共同发明人之一,该仪器后来被PainChek有限公司收购并实现了商业化。Atee 博士是 PainChek 有限公司的股东。他曾在PainChek有限公司担任高级研究科学家一职(2018年10月至2020年5月),目前在哈蒙德卡雷痴呆症中心担任研究与实践负责人(组长)一职。Atee博士与他人合作撰写了题为 "一种疼痛评估方法和系统;PCT/AU2015/000501 "的专利,该专利已转让给PainChek有限公司,该公司迄今已在中国、日本和美国获得授权专利。这封信中既没有提到也没有引用 PainChek® 仪器。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pain is underestimated in older adults with risk of falls

I have read with great interest the Xiao et al. study examining retrospectively the incidence of falls and related factors in outpatient and inpatient elderly sample (n = 451) aged 65 years and above.1 Key factors considered in the study were pain and other comorbidities, such as frailty and osteoarthritis.1 Although the findings have great merits and add to the body of literature, there are some limitations that should have been addressed or reported in the study.

Whereas Xiao et al. data indicate that the association between pain and fall is not statistically significant, this finding was not explicitly presented in the article. More importantly, it is astounding that the study found pain had no impact on the incidence of falls, despite the clear link between pain and falls in older adults in the literature. For example, a 2014 systematic review and meta-analysis by Stubbs et al.2 found that pain was associated with a higher risk of falls, where half (50.5%) of older adults with pain reported at least one fall over a 12-month period. A more recent systematic review found that multisite pain is associated with an increased risk of future falls risk in community-dwelling older people.3 Further, it is well recognized that chronic pain is highly prevalent and disabling in older adults with and without dementia, but it is often an underestimated clinical problem in this population.4 Given that the data in the Xiao et al. study did not involve the pathological state of “chronic pain,” and the latter differs from the concept of pain within 4 weeks, the authors cannot be assertive in concluding that pain had no impact on the incidence of falls. Clearly, the status, duration, and type of pain (e.g., acute nociceptive pain vs. persistent pain) may have influenced these findings and, therefore, the definition of pain should have been further clarified or operationalized in the Xiao et al. study. Moreover, the limitations of the study should have been mentioned that the findings were only applicable to this operational definition of pain.

The sample in the Xiao et al. study included older adults with mild and moderate dementia, whose pain reporting in some may be unreliable or inadequate. Further, the Mini-Mental State Examination instrument was listed in the methodology, but cognition scores were not reported for the sample. Thus, how did the authors ascertain intact cognition and communication skills in the sample? That is, how was the self-reporting capacity of the sample confirmed? If not, why was this not reported in the limitations?

Given that no difference in pain was detected between the fall and nonfall groups by the digital pain drawings instrument and this instrument was not validated in people with dementia, these issues raise the question whether the instrument was sensitive enough to detect any differences in pain between the two groups. This finding is also counterintuitive in the presence of significant differences between the groups in relation to the reduced mobility and the ability of performing daily living activities, as both of these are strongly associated with the presence of pain in older adults.5 Follow-up studies can carry out more in-depth research on the tools and methods of pain assessment and the time window of pain assessment in older adults with risk of falls.

Lastly, recall and documentation biases were not acknowledged in the limitation section of this retrospective study.

Dr Mustafa Atee is the sole author of this publication.

The author received no funding from an external source in relation to this letter.

The author is one of the coinventors of the original PainChek® instrument (branded ePAT at the time), which was acquired and subsequently commercialized by PainChek Ltd. Dr Atee is a shareholder of PainChek Ltd. He previously held the position of a Senior Research Scientist (October 2018–May 2020) at PainChek Ltd, and is currently serving the position of Research and Practice Lead (Team Leader) at The Dementia Centre, HammondCare. Dr Atee coauthored a patent titled “A pain assessment method and system; PCT/AU2015/000501” which was assigned to PainChek Ltd and who have, to date, received granted patents in China, Japan, and the United States. The PainChek® instrument was not mentioned nor cited in this letter.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Aging Medicine
Aging Medicine Medicine-Geriatrics and Gerontology
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
×
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