An observational study of agreement between percentage pain reduction calculated from visual analog or numerical rating scales versus that reported by parturients during labor epidural analgesia

Pratici, E.; Nebout, S.; Merbaï, N.; Filippova, J.; Hajage, David; Keïta, H.

doi:10.1016/j.ijoa.2017.02.001

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…55 Numerous studies have found a moderate overall agreement between patient-reported percentage pain reduction and calculated percentage pain reduction from NRS pain scores, suggesting that these indices can be used interchangeably. [56][57][58] However, it should be noted that there is a discrepancy in the degree of improvement between these two measures, with overestimations of selfreported percentages ranging from 2.6% 57 to 16%. 58 In the current study, however, post hoc analysis demonstrated that the average discrepancy between self-reported and calculated percent improvement was 2.6 ± 8.8% (median: 0%, range: −10 to +25%) from 50 NRS follow-up values, suggesting that overreporting improvement is unlikely to significantly affect the validity of these results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

<p>Intra-Articular Injection of Amniotic Membrane and Umbilical Cord Particulate for the Management of Moderate to Severe Knee Osteoarthritis</p>

Mead¹,

Mead²

2020

ORR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the long-term benefit of a single injection of amniotic membrane/ umbilical cord (AM/UC) particulate in patients with moderate to severe knee osteoarthritis (OA). Methods: A single-center, investigator-initiated, retrospective study of patients who received intra-articular injection of 100 mg lyophilized and micronized AM/UC for radiographically confirmed, Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grade 3 or 4 symptomatic knee OA. Data regarding demographics, OA severity, comorbidities, treatment regimens, complications, and patient-reported outcomes were collected and assessed. Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) was assessed on a 7-point scale, and Global Perceived Improvement (GPI), expressed as percent improvement relative to baseline, was used to further quantify the degree of symptomatic change. Clinically important response to treatment was assessed at 12 months using simplified OMERACT-OARSI responder criteria. Results: A total of 42 patients with KL grade 3 (36%) and 4 (64%) knee OA were included for analysis. Prior to injection, patient-rated pain was 6.6 ± 1.5 out of 10 (median: 7, range: 3-10) despite prior treatment with oral/topical NSAIDs (62%) and intra-articular injection(s) of corticosteroids (57%) and/or hyaluronic acid (48%). Twelve months following AM/UC injection, 31 patients (74%) reported significant clinical improvement via PGIC, and the OMERACT-OARSI treatment response rate was 81% (34/42). GPI of pain and function was 62 ± 24%, 69 ± 27%, 69 ± 27%, and 64 ± 31% at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Symptomatic improvement was maintained for an average duration of 12.1 ± 4.5 months (median: 12, range: 3-22). One patient developed swelling in the knee within 36 hours of injection. No other adverse events or complications were reported. Conclusion: Intra-articular injection of AM/UC particulate may be effective in alleviating pain and improving function in patients with moderate to severe knee OA, with the potential to delay total knee replacement for up to 12 months.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

<p>Intra-Articular Injection of Amniotic Membrane and Umbilical Cord Particulate for the Management of Moderate to Severe Knee Osteoarthritis</p>

Mead¹,

Mead²

2020

ORR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A recent single-center retrospective review of 174 SCS patients indicated that PRPRs are strongly correlated with calculated percentage pain reductions, and that the former are consistently higher 48 . Similar trends have been observed across a variety of pain populations 49–51 . Thus, stated vs. calculated pain reduction percentages may not be equivalent; stated percentages, as a momentary measure in the context of current background pain, may be the more personally salient descriptor.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…48 Similar trends have been observed across a variety of pain populations. [49][50][51] Thus, stated vs. calculated pain reduction percentages may not be equivalent; stated percentages, as a momentary measure in the context of current background pain, may be the more personally salient descriptor. In addition, >50% of the subjects in this report who initially said that pain had a major impact in their lives improved by at least one category, whereas nearly half of opioid users maintained their dosage reduction through 24 months.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Passive Recharge Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation Provides Sustainable Improvements in Pain and Psychosocial Function: 2-year Results From the TRIUMPH Study

Deer

Falowski²,

Moore³

et al. 2021

Spine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to assess long-term safety and effectiveness of spinal cord stimulation using a passive recharge burst stimulation design for chronic intractable pain in the trunk and/or limbs. Herein we present 24-month outcomes from the TRIUMPH study (NCT03082261). Summary of Background Data. Passive recharge burst spinal cord stimulation (B-SCS) uniquely mimics neuronal burst firing patterns in the nervous system and has been shown to modulate the affective and attentional components of pain processing. Methods. After a successful trial period, subjects received a permanent SCS implant and returned for follow-up at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Results. Significant improvements in physical, mental, and emotional functioning observed after 6 months of treatment were maintained at 2 years. Pain catastrophizing scale (PCS) scores dropped below the population norm. Health-related quality of life on EQ-5D improved across all domains and the mean index score was within one standard deviation of norm. Pain reduction (on NRS) was statistically significant (P < 0.001) at all timepoints. Patient reported pain relief, a stated percentage of improvement in pain, was consistent at all timepoints at 60%. Patients reported significant improvements across all measures including activity levels and impact of pain on daily life. At 24 months, 84% of subjects were satisfied and 90% would recommend the procedure. Subjects decreased their chronic pain medication intake for all categories; 38% reduced psychotropic and muscle relaxants, 46% reduced analgesic, anti-convulsant and NSAIDs, and 48% reduced opioid medication. Adverse events occurred at low rates without unanticipated events. Conclusion. Early positive results with B-SCS were maintained long term. Evidence across multiple assessment tools show that B-SCS can alleviate pain intensity, psychological distress, and improve physical function and health-related quality of life.

show abstract

“…The concordance correlation coefficient was calculated using both the VAR and NRS scores and yielded a coefficient of 0.76 (95% CI 0.6 to 0.8) and 0.77 (95% C.I., 0.6 to 0.8), respectively. The authors concluded that moderate agreement existed between PRPPR and CPPR [ 12 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Intuitively, it would be expected that PRPPR and CPPR would reflect very similar—if not identical—results; however, the limited number of studies have demonstrated that there is in fact a statistically significant discrepancy between them as well as an imperfect agreement between the two [ 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Discrepancy and Agreement between Patient-Reported Percentage Pain Reduction and Calculated Percentage Pain Reduction in Chronic Pain Patients

Fink

Ong

Sumar

et al. 2023

Neurology International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two derivatives of the numeric rating scale (NRS) and visual analog scale (VAS), namely patient-reported percentage pain reduction (PRPPR) and calculated percentage pain reduction (CPPR), are commonly used when evaluating pain reduction. A small number of studies have attempted to assess the agreement between PRPPR and CPPR. However, they have been limited in their scope by a focus on specific types of pain, or by their focus on specific treatment modalities. As far as the authors of this article are aware, this is the first study to assess the agreement between PRPPR and CPPR in chronic pain patients, as well as the first to assess how the duration of treatment affects the correlations between PRPPR and CPPR. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to determine whether the duration of treatment affects CPPR and PRPPR, and the discrepancy and agreement between the two. Additionally, the study assessed whether individual treatment modalities, or the lack there of, impacted the discrepancy and correlation between PRPPR and CPPR. The mean PRPPR and CPPR for the entire patient population were 59.98 and 40.71, respectively. The mean discrepancy between the two parameters was 19.27. The agreement between PRPPR and CPPR, as measured by the concordance correlation coefficient, was 0.984 (95% C.I., 0.982–0.986).

show abstract

An observational study of agreement between percentage pain reduction calculated from visual analog or numerical rating scales versus that reported by parturients during labor epidural analgesia

Cited by 7 publications

References 13 publications

<p>Intra-Articular Injection of Amniotic Membrane and Umbilical Cord Particulate for the Management of Moderate to Severe Knee Osteoarthritis</p>

<p>Intra-Articular Injection of Amniotic Membrane and Umbilical Cord Particulate for the Management of Moderate to Severe Knee Osteoarthritis</p>

Passive Recharge Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation Provides Sustainable Improvements in Pain and Psychosocial Function: 2-year Results From the TRIUMPH Study

The Discrepancy and Agreement between Patient-Reported Percentage Pain Reduction and Calculated Percentage Pain Reduction in Chronic Pain Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About