No abstract

Comparison of the epidemiology of 'significant chronic pain' and 'severe chronic pain' with 'any chronic pain' allows an understanding of the more clinically important end of the chronic pain spectrum. These results support the suggestion that chronic pain is multidimensional, both in its aetiology and in its effects, particularly at this end of the spectrum. This must be addressed in management and in further research.

The Chronic Pain Grade questionnaire has been proposed as an interview-administered, multi-dimensional measure of chronic pain severity in selected populations with chronic pain in the United States of America. It has not previously been tested in the United Kingdom, in self-completion form or in an unselected general population. We undertook a postal survey to assess its reliability, validity and acceptability in these circumstances, using a general practice population in Scotland, with a practice population of 11202 patients. A random sample of 400 patients aged over 18 was drawn, stratified for age, gender and receipt or non-receipt of regular prescriptions for pain-relieving medication. The dimensions and sub-scales of the Chronic Pain Grade were compared with the SF-36 general health questionnaire and questions relating to duration of any pain and attempts to seek treatment for this. The methodological approach proposed by Streiner and Norman (1989) was used to assess validity and reliability. A response rate of 76% was achieved. Cronbach's alpha was > 0.9 and item-total correlations were all high, indicating good internal consistency and reliability. Validity was confirmed by psychometric testing, including confirmatory factor analysis. Good correlations with comparable dimensions of the SF-36 general health questionnaire confirmed convergent validity. Construct validity was confirmed by testing scores against duration of pain and treatment sought for pain. We concluded that the Chronic Pain Grade questionnaire is a useful, reliable and valid measure of severity of chronic pain. It translates well into UK English and is acceptable in general population postal research.

No abstract

SUMMARY The Mahalanobis distance is a well‐known criterion which may be used for detecting outliers in multivariate data. However, there are some discrepancies about which critical values are suitable for this purpose. Following a comparison with Wilks's method, this paper shows that the previously recommended (p(n – 1)/(n – p)}Fp,n–p are unsuitable, and p(n – 1)2 Fp,n–p–t /n(n – p – 1 + pFp,n‐p–1) are the correct critical values when searching for a single outlier. The importance of which critical values should be used is illustrated when searching for a single outlier in a clinical laboratory data set containing 10 patients and five variables. The jackknifed Mahalanobis distance is also discussed and the relevant critical values are given. Finally, upper bounds for the usual Mahalanobis distance and the jackknifed version are discussed.

In Europe there are great differences between centres in the frequency of CPP monitoring and ventilatory support applied to head-injured patients. ICP measurement disclosed a high rate of intracranial hypertension, which was not suspected in patients evaluated on a clinical basis alone. ICP monitoring was associated with a low rate of complications. Cases with severe neurological impairment, and with the worse outcome, were treated and monitored more intensively.

When an admission CT scan demonstrates evidence of a diffuse injury, follow-up scans should be performed, because approximately one in six such patients will demonstrate significant CT evolution. In studies comparing series of head-injured patients, correspondence of timing of CT scans is necessary for valid comparison.

Chronic pain is an important cause of suffering, disability and loss of productivity within the community. Chronic pain can also be viewed as a multidimensional phenomenon, and may be associated with increased suffering of a social and psychological nature, as well as physical suffering. In this paper, the severity of the chronic pain gradings (CPG) is defined in terms of physical, social and psychological well-being, as measured by the SF36 and Glasgow Pain Questionnaire. Although previous work has shown the chronic pain grade to be a valid measure of chronic pain severity, little is known of the relationship between this and other health measures. A random sample of 5036 individuals, representative of the general population, stratified for age and sex, was drawn. A further sample of 4175 patients was drawn from a list of patients enrolled for repeat prescriptions for analgesic medication. A questionnaire survey was carried out, and response rates of 82 and 87% were achieved, respectively. The comparisons described confirm the widespread impact of chronic pain on all aspects of health, supporting the multidimensional view. These findings are important in addressing the management of chronic pain patients, and in particular, the social and psychological well-being of a patient needs to be addressed in parallel with the physical well-being in order to successfully reduce the suffering associated with chronic pain.