Caraceni Augusto, Brunelli Cinzia, Martini Cinzia, Zecca Ernesto, De Conno Franco
Rehabilitation and Palliative Care Unit, National Cancer Institute of Milan, Italy.
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2005 May;29(5):507-19. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2004.08.014.
The aim of this review was to evaluate the methods of pain measurement in controlled clinical trials in oncology published between 1999 and 2002. An electronic literature search strategy was used according to established criteria applied to the Medline database and PubMed search engine. Articles were selected to include only studies that had chronic cancer pain as the primary or secondary objective of a controlled clinical trial. A specific evaluation scheme was used to examine how pain measurement methods were chosen and implemented in the study procedures. The search strategy identified 613 articles, and 68 were selected for evaluation. Most articles (69%) chose unidimensional pain measurement tools, such as visual analogue scales, numerical rating scales and verbal rating scales, whereas others used questionnaires. The implementation of the pain assessment method was problematic in many studies, especially as far as time frame of pain assessment (70%), administration modalities (46%), and use of non-validated measurement methods (10%). Design of study and data analysis were often unclear about the definition of pain outcome measure (40%), patient compliance with pain assessment (98%), and impact of missing data (56%). Statistical techniques were seldom appropriate to the type of data collected and often inadequate to describe the pain variable under study. It is clear from this review that most authors were aware of the need of valid pain measurement tools to be used in clinical trials. However, too often these tools were not appropriately used in the trial, or at least their use was not described with sufficient accuracy in the trial methods.
本综述的目的是评估1999年至2002年间发表的肿瘤学对照临床试验中的疼痛测量方法。根据应用于Medline数据库和PubMed搜索引擎的既定标准,采用了电子文献检索策略。入选的文章仅包括以慢性癌痛作为对照临床试验主要或次要目标的研究。使用特定的评估方案来检查疼痛测量方法在研究过程中是如何选择和实施的。检索策略共识别出613篇文章,其中68篇被选作评估之用。大多数文章(69%)选择了单维度疼痛测量工具,如视觉模拟量表、数字评定量表和语言评定量表,而其他文章则使用了问卷。在许多研究中,疼痛评估方法的实施存在问题,尤其是在疼痛评估的时间框架(70%)、给药方式(46%)以及使用未经验证的测量方法(10%)方面。研究设计和数据分析往往在疼痛结局指标的定义(40%)、患者对疼痛评估的依从性(98%)以及缺失数据的影响(56%)方面不明确。统计技术很少适用于所收集的数据类型,而且往往不足以描述所研究的疼痛变量。从本综述中可以清楚地看出,大多数作者都意识到在临床试验中需要使用有效的疼痛测量工具。然而,这些工具在试验中往往没有得到恰当使用,或者至少在试验方法中对其使用的描述不够准确。