Articles: pain-measurement.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Attentional strategy moderates effects of pain catastrophizing on symptom-specific physiological responses in chronic low back pain patients.
In the present study, we examined whether experimentally-manipulated attentional strategies moderated relations between pain catastrophizing and symptom-specific physiological responses to a cold-pressor task among sixty-eight chronic low back patients. Patients completed measures of pain catastrophizing and depression, and were randomly assigned to sensory focus, distraction or suppression conditions during a cold pressor. Lumbar paraspinal and trapezius EMG, and cardiovascular responses to the cold pressor were assessed. ⋯ Depressed affect did not account for this relation. These findings indicate that 'symptom-specific' responses among pain catastrophizers with chronic low back depend on how they attend to pain-related information. Specifically, it appears that efforts to suppress awareness of pain exaggerate muscular responses near the site of injury.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Continued sports activity, using a pain-monitoring model, during rehabilitation in patients with Achilles tendinopathy: a randomized controlled study.
Achilles tendinopathy is a common overuse injury, especially among athletes involved in activities that include running and jumping. Often an initial period of rest from the pain-provoking activity is recommended. ⋯ No negative effects could be demonstrated from continuing Achilles tendon-loading activity, such as running and jumping, with the use of a pain-monitoring model, during treatment. Our treatment protocol for patients with Achilles tendinopathy, which gradually increases the load on the Achilles tendon and calf muscle, demonstrated significant improvements. A training regimen of continued, pain-monitored, tendon-loading physical activity might therefore represent a valuable option for patients with Achilles tendinopathy.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
The measurement of musculoskeletal pain intensity: a comparison of four methods.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of four scales of pain intensity measurement in patients with musculoskeletal disorders and low educational level. Verbal rating scale, face scale, visual analogy scale, and numeric scale were used. ⋯ Numerical scale presented the highest reliability value (r = 0.99), and verbal rating scale, had the lowest reliability value (r = 0.88). The numerical scale was considered the easiest to understand and to complete, while the most difficult was the visual analogy scale.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Making pain assessment more accessible to children and parents: can greater involvement improve the quality of care?
To determine whether nursing and parental pain assessment documentation and analgesia administration increased with the use of a temporary tattoo of a pain intensity scale (TTPS) compared with a paper version of the pain scale (PPS). To document any adverse skin reactions from the use of the TTPS and to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the PPS and TTPS for use as postoperative pain assessment tools in the home and clinical setting. ⋯ The TTPS is a new method to engage children in pain assessment, which may have positive effects on the quality of postoperative pain assessment and management in hospital and home settings. Larger trials are needed to determine the effectiveness of the TTPS across all pediatric settings and for children with nonsurgical and also surgical pain. The findings from these pilot trials provide useful information for design and power estimation for further research in inpatient and home settings.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Assessor status influences pain recall.
Anecdotal clinical reports suggest that patients report differing levels of pain, depending on the status within the medical hierarchy of the individual gathering the pain rating. This observation has clinical relevance, given the practice of delegating the assessment of pain to lower status clinic staff members. In this study, both pain and mood were assessed in 70 patients diagnosed with low back pain at pretreatment, immediately after epidural lumbar injection, and again 2 weeks later by phone. At the 2-week follow-up, patients were also asked to recall the postprocedural rating that they had given immediately after the injection. This rating was obtained by either the treating physician or by a research assistant who was present at the time of injection, on a randomly determined basis. Current ratings of pain and mood did not differ for either group before the epidural injection, after the epidural injection, or at the 2-week follow-up. Two-week recall of postprocedural pain did, however, differ depending on assessor status. Those called by the physician provided recalled pain ratings that closely matched the ratings provided immediately after the procedure. Those called by the research assistant provided ratings that were 86% higher (that is, worse) than their original ratings. This status-driven bias in recalled postprocedural pain reporting is discussed in the context of social demands inherent in the physician-patient relationship, with implications for assessing treatment effectiveness in clinical practice and research. ⋯ Accurate assessment of patients' pain is critical to effective pain management and treatment planning. This study found evidence of a status-based bias in which physicians elicited lower ratings of previously experienced pain associated with treatment procedures than did staff members of lower status.