Psychometric properties of the shortened disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (QuickDASH) and Numeric Pain Rating Scale in patients with shoulder pain

2009 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 920-926 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul E. Mintken ◽  
Paul Glynn ◽  
Joshua A. Cleland
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Shoulder Pain ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Pain Rating ◽  
Numeric Pain Rating Scale ◽  
Pain Rating Scale

Responsiveness of the Numeric Pain Rating Scale in Patients With Shoulder Pain and the Effect of Surgical Status

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lori A. Michener ◽  
Alison R. Snyder ◽  
Brian G. Leggin
Keyword(s):  
Shoulder Pain ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Outpatient Rehabilitation ◽  
Pain Rating ◽  
Characteristic Analysis ◽  
Point Change ◽  
Numeric Pain Rating Scale ◽  
Pain Rating Scale

Context:The Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) is commonly used to assess pain. Change in the NPRS across time can be interpreted with responsiveness indices.Objective:To determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the NPRS.Design:Single-group repeated measures.Setting:Outpatient rehabilitation clinics.Patients:Patients with shoulder pain (N = 136).Main Outcome Measures:At the initial evaluation patients completed the Penn Shoulder Score (PSS), which includes pain, satisfaction, and function sections. Pain was measured using an 11-point NPRS for 3 conditions of pain: at rest, with normal daily activities, and with strenuous activities. The NPRS average was calculated by averaging the NPRS scores for 3 conditions of pain. The final PSS was completed after 3–4 wk of rehabilitation. To determine the MCID for the NPRS average, the minimal detectible change of 8.6 points for the PSS function scale (0–60 points) was used as an external criterion anchor to classify patients as meaningfully improved (≥8.6 point change) or not improved (<8.6-point change). The MCID for the NPRS average was also determined for subgroups of surgical and nonsurgical patients. Cohen’s effect sizes were calculated as a measure of group responsiveness for the NPRS average.Results:Using a receiver-operating-characteristic analysis, the MCID for the average NPRS for all patients was 2.17, and it was 2.17 for both the surgical and nonsurgical subgroup: area-under-the-curve range .74–.76 (95%CI: .55–.95). The effect size for all patients was 1.84, and it was 1.51 and 1.94 for the surgical and nonsurgical groups, respectively.Conclusions:The NPRS average of 3 pain questions demonstrated responsiveness with an MCID of 2.17 in patients with shoulder pain receiving rehabilitation for 3–4 wk. The effect sizes indicated a large effect. However, responsiveness values are not static. Further research is indicated to assess responsiveness of the NPRS average in different types of patients with shoulder pain.

scholarly journals Evaluation of full cup test and numeric pain rating scale in the assessment of orofacial pain

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 292-295
Author(s):  
Roland Prethipa P ◽  
Jimsha V K ◽  
Jonathan Daniel M
Keyword(s):  
Pain Assessment ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Orofacial Pain ◽  
Study Data ◽  
Self Report ◽  
P Value ◽  
Pain Rating ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Numeric Pain Rating Scale ◽  
Pain Rating Scale

Pain intensity is a common outcome domain assessed in pain clinical trials. The patient’s self-report is the gold standard and it appears to be embedded in everyday clinical practice. Most often pain assessment is considered to be the cornerstone for ideal treatment.The aim of this study was to assess the dental patients’ level of pain using Full Cup Test (FCT) and Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), and to compare and validate the Full Cup Test in the assessment of orofacial pain with Numeric Pain Rating Scale.A total of sixty patients presenting with various forms of orofacial pain were included in this cross-sectional study. Data collected include the patient demographic details and the diagnosis of each case was made after proper history taking, clinical examination and radiographic investigation. Pain assessment was done for each patient using both numeric pain rating scale and full cup test.All the data were analysed using inferential statistics Mann Whitney test and the analysis was carried out with SPSS 17.The comparison of mean pain scores using full cup test and numeric pain rating scale shows there was significant differences between acute and chronic pain with P- value of 0.023 and 0.005 respectively. FCT had shown 83 percent sensitivity and 94 percent specificity.Patients who presented with either acute or chronic dental conditions experienced moderate to severe level of pain. FCT is useful for both evaluating and discerning changes in pain and it can be used as a tool in pain assessment.

scholarly journals A De Quervain-féle tendinopathia kezelése konzervatív módszerekkel

2020 ◽  
Vol 161 (11) ◽  
pp. 419-424
Author(s):  
László Földvári-Nagy ◽  
Johanna Takács ◽  
Judit Réka Hetthéssy ◽  
Ágnes Andrea Mayer ◽  
Noémi Szakács ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Pain Rating ◽  
De Quervain ◽  
Numeric Pain Rating Scale ◽  
Microsoft Office ◽  
Pain Rating Scale

Absztrakt: Bevezetés: A De Quervain-féle tendinopathia a csukló-kéz régióját érintő betegség. A hüvelykujj mozgatása fájdalmassá válik, a kéz funkciója jelentősen romlik. A betegség a legújabb kutatások szerint inkább degeneratív, semmint gyulladásos eredetű. Első lépésként a kéz sínezése, nemszteroid gyulladáscsökkentő szerek és különböző fizikoterápiás kezelések alkalmazása javasolt. Hatástalanságuk esetén további lehetőség az ínhüvelybe fecskendezett szteroidinjekció és a műtéti úton végzett ínhüvelybemetszés. Célkitűzés: Kutatásunkban megvizsgáltuk, hogy az excentrikus tréninggel kibővített konzervatív kezelés megfelelő alternatíváját nyújthatja-e a jelenleg elfogadott kezelési lehetőségeknek. Módszer: Az excentrikus tréning 8 hétig tartott, melyet indokolt esetben 12 hetesre bővítettünk. A betegek (n = 9) a betanítást követően naponta többször végezték a tréninget, amit a heti találkozók alkalmával kontrolláltunk. Az 1., a 8., valamint a 12. heti találkozó során az inspekciót követően mértük az ízületi mozgástartományt, az izomerőt, a fájdalmas régiók számát, illetve elvégeztük a ’Numeric Pain Rating Scale’, a ’Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand’, valamint a ’Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation’ kérdőívek felvételét. A méréseket páros mintás t-teszttel és ismételt méréses varianciaanalízissel elemeztük. Az elemzéseket IBM SPSS Statistics 25.0 és Microsoft Office Excel Professional Plus 2016 programmal végeztük; p<0,05 esetén tekintettük statisztikailag szignifikánsnak eredményeinket. Eredmények: Szignifikáns javulást mértünk a fájdalom intenzitása (’Numeric Pain Rating Scale’ p = 0,005, n = 9) és a kéz, valamint a csukló funkciója terén (’Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Outcome Measure’ kérdőív 1. rész p<0,001, 2. rész p<0,001, ’Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation’ kérdőív p<0,001; n = 9). Következtetés: Eredményeink alapján megfelelő betegbeválasztás mellett az excentrikus tréninggel kibővített konzervatív kezelés valós alternatívája lehet a jelenleg alkalmazott kezeléseknek. Orv Hetil. 2020; 161(11): 419–424.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document