scholarly journals 583 Psychometric validation and meaningful change threshold of the worst itching intensity numerical rating scale for use in hemodialysis patients with pruritus

2018 ◽  
Vol 138 (5) ◽  
pp. S99 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Munera ◽  
M.K. Vernon ◽  
J.W. Stauffer ◽  
R.H. Spencer ◽  
F. Menzaghi
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret K. Vernon ◽  
Laura L. Swett ◽  
Rebecca M. Speck ◽  
Catherine Munera ◽  
Robert H. Spencer ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus (CKD-aP) is characterized by persistent itch that often leads to substantially impaired quality of life. The Worst Itching Intensity Numerical Rating Scale (WI-NRS) is a single-item patient-reported outcome measure in which patients indicate the intensity of the worst itching they experienced over the past 24 h. Here, we evaluated the content validity and psychometric properties of the WI-NRS and confirmed the threshold of meaningful change in hemodialysis patients with moderate-to-severe CKD-aP. Methods Content validity interviews were conducted in 23 patients. Psychometric properties of the WI-NRS were assessed using data from one phase 2 (N = 174) and two phase 3 (N = 848) clinical trials investigating an anti-pruritic treatment. Anchor-based methods were used to confirm meaningful within-patient change score thresholds in the phase 3 trial patients and mixed-method exit interviews (N = 70) contributed further insight. Results Content validity interviews indicated patients considered the WI-NRS to be straightforward, comprehensive, and relevant. Test–retest reliability was strong in both trial cohorts (intraclass correlation coefficients > 0.75). Construct validity analyses indicated high correlation between the WI-NRS and other measures of itch. Anchor-based analyses showed a reduction of ≥ 3 points from baseline score represented an appropriate clinically meaningful within-patient change on the WI-NRS. In the exit interviews, all patients with a reduction ≥ 3 points considered the change meaningful. Conclusions The WI-NRS is a reliable, valid, and responsive measure of itch intensity for patients with moderate-to-severe CKD-aP. These results support its use to assess treatment efficacy and in clinical evaluation and management of pruritus in hemodialysis patients.


Author(s):  
Zahra Abbas Ali Madadi ◽  
Jalil Azimian ◽  
Farzaneh Falahatpishe ◽  
Mahmoud Alipour Heidari

Background: Pain and stress of hemodialysis are experienced by more than 50% of patients who are suffering from renal disease; hence decreasing a part of these adverse effects can be effective on individual’s long term coping with hemodialysis. The current study was done to determine the effect of warm footbath with vibration on arteriovenous fistula puncture-related pain in hemodialysis patients.Methods: This clinical trial was conducted on 31 hemodialysis patients in 2014. The patients were selected by simple random sampling method and placed in one group. First, the pain intensity of all patients was measured in the six frequent hemodialysis sessions without any intervention (control method). After two weeks, the intervention of warm footbath with vibration was done on all patients and the pain intensity was measured for six frequent hemodialysis sessions (intervention method). The patients were received 40±2 °C footbath with vibration by foot massage spa machine for ten minutes; then, fistula needles were placed and the pain intensity was assessed by using a numerical rating scale. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and T test.Results: The study group had contained 20 males (64.5%), 11 females (35.5%), with an average age of 44.16±14.85 and a range of 18 to 65 years old, which shows that the pain intensity of the warm footbath with vibration method was lower than the control method (P< 0.05).Conclusions: Warm footbath with vibration can be used as an effective palliative method to reduce pain of hemodialysis patients.


2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jia-Wen Lai ◽  
Hung-Chih Chen ◽  
Che-Yi Chou ◽  
Hung-Rong Yen ◽  
Tsai-Chung Li ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-21
Author(s):  
Mani Mofidi ◽  
Ali Dashti ◽  
Mahdi Rezai ◽  
Niloufar Ghodrati ◽  
Hoorolnesa Ameli ◽  
...  

Introduction: This study was designed to compare the effectiveness of intravenous morphine with nebulized morphine in pain relief of patients referring to the emergency setting with traumatic musculoskeletal pain. Methods: This randomized, placebo-controlled and double-blind clinical study evaluated 160 patients 18 to 65 years of age with acute traumatic pain, who attended the emergency department during 2019. Subjects were assessed with Numerical Rating Scale based on inclusion and exclusion criteria and randomly divided into two groups. In one group, 80 patients received IV morphine (0.1 mg/kg+5 mL normal saline) plus an equivalent volume of IV placebo. In the second group, 80 patients received nebulized morphine (0.2 mg/kg+5 mL normal saline) plus nebulized placebo. Pain score was monitored in all patients with Numerical Rating Scale before and after intervention at baseline, 15, 30, 45, and 60-minute intervals. Patients’ vital signs and possible adverse events were evaluated in each observation time points. Finally, all participants were assessed for their satisfaction with pain management. Data were analyzed using repeated measure analysis for continuous variables and Binomial test for categorical variables Results: There was no significant difference between the demographic characteristics of patients in study groups. Pain relief between the two groups was similar during the observation (0, 15, 30, 45, 60 min) (P>0.05). There were no changes in vital signs between two groups, although the nebulized group had lower systolic blood pressure at the time-point of 15 minutes after the treatment initiation (P=0.03). Conclusion: Although Nebulized morphine has similar efficacy in comparison with IV route, nebulization might be considered as the clinically efficacious route of morphine administration with minimal side effects, providing optimal pain relief in patients.


2020 ◽  
Vol 103 (10) ◽  
pp. 1028-1035

Background: Craniotomy causes acute and chronic pain. Uncontrolled postoperative pain may lead to adverse events. Perioperative scalp nerves block is not only effective in reducing intraoperative hemodynamic response, but it also reduces postoperative pain and postoperative analgesia requirement. Objective: To compare the benefits of adding dexmedetomidine to levobupivacaine in scalp nerves block before craniotomy for the duration of analgesia in supratentorial craniotomy. Materials and Methods: After approval by the Committee for Research, 50 supratentorial craniotomy patients were randomized into two groups. The control group received 30 mL scalp nerves block with 0.25% levobupivacaine with adrenaline 1:200,000, whereas the study group received 30 mL scalp nerves block with 0.25% levobupivacaine with adrenaline 1:200,000 plus dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/kg. The primary outcome was the time to first analgesic requirement postoperatively. The secondary outcomes included intraoperative fentanyl consumption, verbal numerical rating scale, tramadol consumption, and complications during the first 24 hours postoperatively. Results: Patients in the study group had significantly increase time to the first analgesic requirement in postoperative period and reduced intraoperative fentanyl consumption. The median time to first analgesic requirement was 555 (360 to 1,035) minutes in the study group versus 405 (300 to 520) minutes in the control group (p=0.023). Intraoperative fentanyl consumption 125 (75 to 175) mcg in the study group was significantly lower than 200 (150 to 250) mcg in the control group (p=0.02). The verbal numerical rating scale at 1, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours postoperatively, tramadol consumption, and complications during the first 24 hours postoperatively were not statistically significant different. Conclusion: Preoperative scalp nerves block with 0.25% levobupivacaine with adrenaline (1:200,000) with dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/kg significantly increased the time to first analgesic requirement and reduced intraoperative fentanyl consumption compared to 0.25% levobupivacaine with adrenaline (1:200,000) without perioperative complications. Keywords: Scalp block, Dexmedetomidine, Post-craniotomy analgesia, Supratentorial tumor, Levobupivacaine


Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Helena Marzo-Ortega ◽  
Chiara Perella ◽  
Denis Poddubnyy ◽  
Effie Pournara ◽  
Agnieszka Zielińska ◽  
...  

Abstract Background/Aims  SKIPPAIN (NCT03136861) is the first randomised controlled study involving a biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, with a primary endpoint of spinal pain at Week 8 in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA; ankylosing spondylitis [AS] and non-radiographic [nr]-axSpA). We present the 24-week results of secukinumab in reducing spinal pain and disease activity following step-up dosing. Methods  This double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 3b study enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with active disease (BASDAI ≥4; average spinal pain numerical rating scale [NRS] score &gt;4 at baseline; inadequate response to ≥ 2 non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs ≥4 weeks). Patients were randomised (3:1) to subcutaneous secukinumab 150 mg or placebo weekly followed by every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Week 4. At Week 8, placebo patients were re-randomised to secukinumab 150 or 300 mg Q4W. Patients originally randomised to secukinumab 150 mg were classified as responders or non-responders (spinal pain NRS score &lt;4 or ≥ 4, respectively) at Week 8. Responders were re-assigned to continue doubleblind secukinumab 150 mg Q4W (Arm A1). Non-responders were re-randomised to double-blind secukinumab 150 mg (Arm A2) or a step-up dose of 300 mg (Arm A3) Q4W. Treatment was up to Week 24. Primary endpoint: proportion of patients achieving an average spinal pain score &lt;4 on a 0-10 NRS with secukinumab vs placebo at Week 8. Results  380 axSpA patients (269/380 [70.8%] AS; 111/380 [29.2%] nr-axSpA) were randomised to secukinumab 150 mg (N = 285) or placebo (N = 95). The primary endpoint was met (proportion of spinal pain NRS [average] score responders: 32% vs 20%; odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.9 [1.1-3.3] favouring secukinumab vs placebo; P &lt; 0.05). Further reductions in spinal pain occurred at Week 24, especially in those initially randomised to placebo and switched to active drug. Pronounced improvements were observed in other disease activity measurements (Table 1). Numerically, more patients achieved ASDAS low disease activity at Week 24 post-secukinumab dose escalation (Arm A3) vs those remaining on the same dose (Arm A2). Conclusion  Secukinumab provided rapid, significant improvement in spinal pain and led to low disease activity in axSpA patients. Secukinumab dose escalation might be beneficial for patients not responding fully to the starting dose. P188 Table 1:Spinal pain and ASDAS-CRP scores at Weeks 8 and 24Week 8SEC 150 mg (N = 285)PBO (N = 95)Change from baseline in spinal pain NRS score (total), mean (SD) [n]-2.6 (2.5) [279]-1.5 (2.2) [92]Change from baseline in ASDAS-CRP score, mean (SD) [n]-1.2 (1.0) [271]-0.5 (0.8) [89]Week 24Active treatment group (SEC treatment starting at baseline)PBO switchers group (SEC treatment starting at Week 8)Arm A1 (SEC 150 R-150) N = 90Arm A2 (SEC 150 NR-150) N = 94Arm A3 (SEC 150 NR-300) N = 94Arm B1 (PBO-SEC 150) N = 45Arm B2 (PBO-SEC 300) N = 44Change from Week 8 in spinal pain NRS score (total), mean (SD) [n]-0.4 (1.5) [88]-2.1 (2.2) [93]-1.9 (2.2) [91]-2.5 (2.6) [45]-2.9 (2.6) [43]Change from baseline in ASDAS-CRP score, mean (SD) [n]-2.2 (1.0) [86]-1.2 (1.0) [93]-1.5 (1.0) [92]-1.5 (1.1) [44]-1.8 (0.9) [43]Arm A1=SEC responder to SEC 150 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 R-150); Arm A2=SEC non-responder to SEC 150 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 NR-150); Arm A3=SEC non-responder to SEC 300 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 NR-300); Arm B1=Placebo patients to SEC 150 mg (PBO-SEC 150); Arm B2=Placebo patients to SEC 300 mg (PBO-SEC 300). ASDAS-CRP, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein; N, total number of patients randomised; n, number of evaluable patients; NR, non-responders; NRS, numerical rating scale; PBO, placebo; R, responders; SD, standard deviation; SEC, secukinumab. Disclosure  H. Marzo-Ortega: Consultancies; AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. Member of speakers’ bureau; AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, UCB. Grants/research support; Janssen, Novartis. C. Perella: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock. D. Poddubnyy: Consultancies; Consultant/speaker for: AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB. Grants/research support; AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer. E. Pournara: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock. A. Zielińska: Consultancies; Novartis, Pfizer. A. Baranauskaite: Consultancies; AbbVie. Member of speakers’ bureau; Novartis, AbbVie, Amgen, Roche, KRKA. S. Sadhu: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. B. Schulz: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. M. Rissler: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 1186-1194
Author(s):  
Sheila Glenn ◽  
Helen Poole ◽  
Paula Oulton

Accurate assessment of pain by health-care professionals is essential to ensure optimal management of pain. An under-researched area is whether personality characteristics affect perception of pain in others. The aims were (a) to determine whether individual differences are associated with participants’ ability to assess pain, and (b) to determine facial cues used in the assessment of pain. One hundred and twenty-eight undergraduate students participated. They completed questionnaire assessments of empathy, pain catastrophizing, sensory sensitivity and emotional intelligence. They then viewed and rated four adult facial images (no, medium, and high pain—12 images total) using a 0–10 numerical rating scale, and noted the reasons for their ratings. (a) Empathy was the only characteristic associated with accuracy of pain assessment. (b) Descriptions of eyes and mouth, and eyes alone were most commonly associated with assessment accuracy. This was the case despite variations in the expression of pain in the four faces. Future studies could evaluate the effect on accuracy of pain assessment of (a) training empathic skills for pain assessment, and (b) emphasizing attention to the eyes, and eyes and mouth.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Deng ◽  
Xiao-min Hou ◽  
Xu-yan Zhou ◽  
Qing-he Zhou

Abstract Background Rhomboid intercostal block (RIB) and Rhomboid intercostal block with sub-serratus plane block (RISS) are the two types of plane blocks used for postoperative analgesia after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). This prospective randomized controlled trial was performed to analyze the postoperative analgesic effects of ultrasound-guided RIB block and RISS block after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. Methods Ninety patients aged between 18 and 80 years, with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status Classes I–II and scheduled for elective unilateral VATS were randomly allocated into three groups. In group C, no block intervention was performed. Patients in group RIB received ultrasound-guided RIB with 20-mL 0.375% ropivacaine and those in group RISS received ultrasound-guided RIB and serratus plane block using a total of 40-mL 0.375% ropivacaine. All patients received intravenous sufentanil patient-controlled analgesia upon arrival in the recovery room. Postoperative sufentanil consumption and pain scores were compared among the groups. Results The dosages of sufentanil consumption at 24 h after the surgery in the RIB and RISS groups were significantly lower than that in group C (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001 for all comparisons, respectively), the postoperative Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores in the RIB and RISS groups at 0.5, 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 h after surgery when patients were at rest or active were significantly lower than that in group C (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). The required dosage of sufentanil and time to first postoperative analgesic request in groupRISS were less than those in the group RIB at 24 h after the surgery (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001 for all comparisons, respectively). Similarly, the Numerical Rating Scale scores for group RISS at 12, 18, and 24 h after the surgery when the patients were active were significantly lower than those for group RIB (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). Conclusion Both ultrasound-guided RIB block and RISS block can effectively reduce the demand for sufentanil within 24 h after VATS, and less sufentanil dosage is needed in patient with RISS block. Ultrasound-guided RIB block and RISS block can effectively relieve pain within 24 h after VATS, and RISS block is more effective.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document