Measuring acute postoperative pain using the visual analog scale: the minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptom state

British Journal of Anaesthesia - Tập 118 Số 3 - Trang 424-429 - 2017
Paul S. Myles1,2, Dan Myles2, Wendy Galagher1, David B. Boyd1, Colleen Chew1, Alexander R. Vaccaro3, A.T. Dennis3
1Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Alfred Hospital and Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
2Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
3Department of Anaesthesia, Royal Women's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia

Tóm tắt

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Jensen, 1986, The measurement of clinical pain intensity: a comparison of six methods, Pain, 27, 117, 10.1016/0304-3959(86)90228-9

Revill, 1976, The reliability of a linear analogue for evaluating pain, Anaesthesia, 31, 1191, 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1976.tb11971.x

Downie, 1978, Studies with pain rating scales, Ann Rheum Dis, 37, 378, 10.1136/ard.37.4.378

Price, 1994, A comparison of pain measurement characteristics of mechanical visual analogue and simple numerical rating scales, Pain, 56, 217, 10.1016/0304-3959(94)90097-3

DeLoach, 1998, The visual analog scale in the immediate postoperative period: intrasubject variability and correlation with a numeric scale, Anesth Analg, 86, 102

Campbell, 1998, Quantifying meaningful changes in pain, Anaesthesia, 53, 121, 10.1046/j.1365-2044.1998.00294.x

Myles, 2005, The linearity of the visual analogue scale in patients with severe acute pain, Anaesth Intensive Care, 33, 54, 10.1177/0310057X0503300108

Bodian, 2001, The visual analog scale for pain: clinical significance in postoperative patients, Anesthesiology, 95, 1356, 10.1097/00000542-200112000-00013

Myles, 2011, Measuring pain and analgesic response, Eur J Anaesthesiol, 28, 399, 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32834592a8

Weibel, 2016, Efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine for postoperative analgesia and recovery after surgery: a systematic review with trial sequential analysis, Br J Anaesth, 116, 770, 10.1093/bja/aew101

Aubrun, 2003, Relationships between measurement of pain using visual analog score and morphine requirements during postoperative intravenous morphine titration, Anesthesiology, 98, 1415, 10.1097/00000542-200306000-00017

Cepeda, 2003, What decline in pain intensity is meaningful to patients with acute pain?, Pain, 105, 151, 10.1016/S0304-3959(03)00176-3

Farrar, 2000, Defining the clinically important difference in pain outcome measures, Pain, 88, 287, 10.1016/S0304-3959(00)00339-0

Dworkin, 2009, Interpreting the clinical importance of group differences in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations, Pain, 146, 238, 10.1016/j.pain.2009.08.019

Tubach, 2005, Minimal clinically important difference, low disease activity state, and patient acceptable symptom state: methodological issues, J Rheumatol, 32, 2025

Wells, 2001, Minimal clinically important differences: review of methods, J Rheumatol, 28, 406

Guyatt, 2002, Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures, Mayo Clin Proc, 77, 371, 10.4065/77.4.371

Moore, 1997, Deriving dichotomous outcome measures from continuous data in randomised controlled trials of analgesics: use of pain intensity and visual analogue scales, Pain, 69, 311, 10.1016/S0304-3959(96)03306-4

Todd, 1996, The minimum clinically important difference in physician-assigned visual analog pain scores, Acad Emerg Med, 3, 142, 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1996.tb03402.x

Auffinger, 2014, Measuring surgical outcomes in subaxial degenerative cervical spine disease patients: minimum clinically important difference as a tool for determining meaningful clinical improvement, Neurosurgery, 74, 206, 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000247

Farrar, 2001, Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale, Pain, 94, 149, 10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00349-9

Childs, 2005, Responsiveness of the numeric pain rating scale in patients with low back pain, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 30, 1331, 10.1097/01.brs.0000164099.92112.29

Emshoff, 2011, Clinically important difference thresholds of the visual analog scale: a conceptual model for identifying meaningful intraindividual changes for pain intensity, Pain, 152, 2277, 10.1016/j.pain.2011.06.003

Kelly, 2001, The minimum clinically significant difference in visual analogue scale pain score does not differ with severity of pain, Emerg Med J, 18, 205, 10.1136/emj.18.3.205

Gallagher, 2001, Prospective validation of clinically important changes in pain severity measured on a visual analog scale, Ann Emerg Med, 38, 633, 10.1067/mem.2001.118863

Tashjian, 2009, Minimal clinically important differences (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for visual analog scales (VAS) measuring pain in patients treated for rotator cuff disease, J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 18, 927, 10.1016/j.jse.2009.03.021

Tubach, 2012, Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken), 64, 1699, 10.1002/acr.21747

Wariaghli, 2013, The patient acceptable symptom state of chronic musculoskeletal pain measured on a visual analog scale in Moroccan patients, Pain Med, 14, 103, 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2012.01529.x

Myles, 2016, Minimal clinically important difference for three quality of recovery scales, Anesthesiology, 125, 39, 10.1097/ALN.0000000000001158

Norman, 2003, Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation, Med Care, 41, 582, 10.1097/01.MLR.0000062554.74615.4C

Samsa, 1999, Determining clinically important differences in health status measures: a general approach with illustration to the Health Utilities Index Mark II, Pharmacoeconomics, 15, 141, 10.2165/00019053-199915020-00003

Eton, 2004, A combination of distribution- and anchor-based approaches determined minimally important differences (MIDs) for four endpoints in a breast cancer scale, J Clin Epidemiol, 57, 898, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.01.012

Wyrwich, 1999, Further evidence supporting an SEM-based criterion for identifying meaningful intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life, J Clin Epidemiol, 52, 861, 10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00071-2

Ringash, 2007, Interpreting clinically significant changes in patient-reported outcomes, Cancer, 110, 196, 10.1002/cncr.22799

Maringwa, 2011, Minimal clinically meaningful differences for the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BN20 scales in brain cancer patients, Ann Oncol, 22, 2107, 10.1093/annonc/mdq726

Juniper, 1994, Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire, J Clin Epidemiol, 47, 81, 10.1016/0895-4356(94)90036-1

Wells, 2003, MCID/Low Disease Activity State Workshop: summary, recommendations, and research agenda, J Rheumatol, 30, 1115

Sedgwick, 2015, How to read a receiver operating characteristic curve, Br Med J, 350, h2464, 10.1136/bmj.h2464

Kirshner, 1985, A methodological framework for assessing health indices, J Chronic Dis, 38, 27, 10.1016/0021-9681(85)90005-0

Kazis, 1989, Effect sizes for intepreting changes in health status, Med Care, 27, S178, 10.1097/00005650-198903001-00015

Perrot, 2013, Pain, 154, 248, 10.1016/j.pain.2012.10.017

Jensen, 2003, Interpretation of visual analog scale ratings and change scores: a reanalysis of two clinical trials of postoperative pain, J Pain, 4, 407, 10.1016/S1526-5900(03)00716-8

Hartrick, 2003, The numeric rating scale for clinical pain measurement: a ratio measure?, Pain Pract, 3, 310, 10.1111/j.1530-7085.2003.03034.x

Bainbridge, 2006, Patient-controlled versus nurse-controlled analgesia after cardiac surgery – a meta-analysis, Can J Anaesth, 53, 492, 10.1007/BF03022623

Lee, 2016, Zero pain is not the goal, JAMA, 315, 1575, 10.1001/jama.2016.1912

Park, 2016, Can a minimal clinically important difference be achieved in elderly patients with adult spinal deformity who undergo minimally invasive spinal surgery?, World Neurosurg, 86, 168, 10.1016/j.wneu.2015.09.072

Myles, 2004, The pain visual analog scale: linear or nonlinear?, Anesthesiology, 100, 744, 10.1097/00000542-200403000-00042

Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use: Guideline on the Choice of the Non-Inferiority Margin. London. 2005. Available from http://wwwemaeuropaeu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003636pdf (accessed 1 July 2016).

Gibbs, 2012, Beyond effect size: consideration of the minimum effect size of interest in anesthesia trials, Anesth Analg, 114, 471, 10.1213/ANE.0b013e31823d2ab7

Sloman, 2006, Determination of clinically meaningful levels of pain reduction in patients experiencing acute postoperative pain, Pain Manag Nurs, 7, 153, 10.1016/j.pmn.2006.09.001