Suppr超能文献

术后疼痛强度评估:中国成年人四种量表的比较

Postoperative pain intensity assessment: a comparison of four scales in Chinese adults.

作者信息

Li Li, Liu Xueqin, Herr Keela

机构信息

Department of Nursing, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.

出版信息

Pain Med. 2007 Apr;8(3):223-34. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2007.00296.x.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine the psychometric properties and applicability of four pain scales in Chinese postoperative adults.

DESIGN

A prospective clinical study.

SETTING

A university-affiliated hospital.

PATIENTS

In total, 173 Chinese patients (age range 18-78 years) undergoing scheduled surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

Recalled pain and anticipated postoperative pain intensity were rated preoperatively with a visual analog scale (VAS), a numeric rating scale (NRS), a verbal descriptor scale (VDS), and the Faces Pain Scale Revised (FPS-R). From the day of surgery to the sixth postoperative day, patients were interviewed for the scores of current operative pain intensity and the worst, least, and average pain on that day. On the sixth postoperative day, retrospective ratings over the 7 days were also obtained and tool preferences were investigated.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Scale reliability was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Scale validity was assessed by correlations between scales, analysis of variance with repeated measures, and the sensitivity of the scales to interventions. Chi-square tests were used to investigate if error rate and preference rate were related to gender, age, and educational level.

RESULTS

All four pain intensity scales had good reliability and validity when used with Chinese adults. The ICCs of the four scales across current, worst, least, and average pain on each postoperative day were consistently high (0.673-0.825), and all scales at each rating were strongly correlated (r = 0.71-0.99). Analysis of variance with repeated measures revealed significant decreases in scores associated with postoperative days, and all four scales were sensitive in evaluating analgesic efficacy. Both the VDS and the FPS-R had low error rates. Nearly half of the participants (48.1%) preferred the FPS-R, followed by the NRS (24.4%), the VDS (23.1%), and the VAS (4.4%); however, no significant differences were noted in terms of gender, age, and educational level.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings demonstrate that although all four scales can be options for Chinese adults to report pain intensity, the FPS-R appears to be the best one. Providing tool options to address individual needs or preferences is suggested.

摘要

目的

确定四种疼痛量表在中国成年术后患者中的心理测量特性及适用性。

设计

一项前瞻性临床研究。

地点

一家大学附属医院。

患者

共有173名接受择期手术的中国患者(年龄范围18 - 78岁)。

干预措施

术前使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)、数字评定量表(NRS)、语言描述量表(VDS)和面部疼痛量表修订版(FPS - R)对回忆性疼痛和预期术后疼痛强度进行评分。从手术当天到术后第6天,对患者进行访谈,了解其当前手术疼痛强度以及当天最严重、最轻和平均疼痛的评分。在术后第6天,还获取了7天内的回顾性评分,并调查了工具偏好。

观察指标

使用组内相关系数(ICC)评估量表的信度。通过量表之间的相关性、重复测量方差分析以及量表对干预措施的敏感性来评估量表的效度。采用卡方检验来研究错误率和偏好率是否与性别、年龄和教育水平相关。

结果

所有四种疼痛强度量表在用于中国成年人时均具有良好的信度和效度。四种量表在术后每天的当前、最严重、最轻和平均疼痛方面的ICC始终较高(0.673 - 0.825),且各量表在每次评分时均呈高度相关(r = 0.71 - 0.99)。重复测量方差分析显示,评分与术后天数显著降低相关,且所有四种量表在评估镇痛效果方面均敏感。VDS和FPS - R的错误率均较低。近一半的参与者(48.1%)更喜欢FPS - R,其次是NRS(24.4%)、VDS(23.1%)和VAS(4.4%);然而,在性别、年龄和教育水平方面未发现显著差异。

结论

这些发现表明,尽管所有四种量表都可作为中国成年人报告疼痛强度的选择,但FPS - R似乎是最佳选择。建议提供工具选项以满足个体需求或偏好。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验