Articles: chronic-pain.
-
World J. Gastroenterol. · Oct 2011
Editorial ReviewChronic proctalgia and chronic pelvic pain syndromes: new etiologic insights and treatment options.
This systematic review addresses the pathophysiology, diagnostic evaluation, and treatment of several chronic pain syndromes affecting the pelvic organs: chronic proctalgia, coccygodynia, pudendal neuralgia, and chronic pelvic pain. Chronic or recurrent pain in the anal canal, rectum, or other pelvic organs occurs in 7% to 24% of the population and is associated with impaired quality of life and high health care costs. ⋯ Excessive tension (spasm) in the striated muscles of the pelvic floor appears to be common to most of the pelvic pain syndromes. This suggests the possibility that similar approaches to diagnostic assessment and treatment may improve outcomes in other pelvic pain disorders.
-
The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Verbal Rating Scale (VRS), and the Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) are among the most commonly used measures of pain intensity in clinical and research settings. Although evidence supports their validity as measures of pain intensity, few studies have compared them with respect to the critical validity criteria of responsivity, and no experiment has directly compared all 4 measures in the same study. The current study compared the relative validity of VAS, NRS, VRS, and FPS-R for detecting differences in painful stimulus intensity and differences between men and women in response to experimentally induced pain. ⋯ The findings are consistent with previous studies supporting the validity of each scale. The most support emerged for the NRS as being both (1) most responsive and (2) able to detect sex differences in pain intensity. The results also provide support for the validity of the scales for use in Portuguese samples.
-
Systematic review. ⋯ Recommendation 1: When selecting the appropriate outcome measures for clinical or research purposes, consider domains that best measure what are most important to patients. Measures that are valid, reliable, and responsive to change should be considered first. Other considerations include the number of items required (especially in the context of multiple measures), whether the measure is validated in the relevant language, and the associated costs or fees. Strength: Strong Recommendation 2: Domains of greatest importance include pain, function, and quality of life. If cost utilization is a priority, then preference-based measures should be considered. For pain, we recommend the VAS and NRPS because of their ease of administration and responsiveness. For function, we recommend the ODI and RMDQ. The SF-36 and its shorter versions are most commonly used and should be considered if quality of life is important. If cost utility is important, consider the EQ-5D or SF-6D. Psychosocial tests are best used as screening tools prior to surgery because of their lack of responsiveness. Complications should always be assessed as a standard of clinical practice. Return to work and medication use are complicated outcome measures and not recommended unless the specific study question is focused on these domains. Consider staff and patient burden when prioritizing one's battery of measures.