Pesonen A, Suojaranta-Ylinen R, Tarkkila P, Rosenberg P H
Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2008 Feb;52(2):267-73. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2007.01480.x. Epub 2007 Nov 1.
Post-operatively, elderly patients with impaired vision and cognitive dysfunction may experience difficulties understanding standard pain assessment tools such as the 10-cm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Verbal Rating Scale (VRS). Thus, there is a need to identify more feasible post-operative pain assessments for elderly patients. With this goal in mind, we compared the VAS and VRS with two more expressive tools: the 50-cm Red Wedge Scale (RWS) and the Facial Pain Scale (FPS).
Cardiac surgery patients (73 +/- 5 years, mean +/- SD) were allocated to an RWS (n=80) or an FPS (n=80) group. Pain was assessed at rest and after movement during the first 4 days after tracheal extubation. The RWS or FPS assessments were repeated after 10 min. All patients completed the VRS and VAS.
The rates of successful pain measurement on study day 1 were: VRS 86%, VAS 62%, RWS 78%, and FPS 60%. Pain measurements with the RWS correlated with the VAS (r=0.758, P<0.001) and weaker with the VRS (r=0.666, P<0.001) measurements. Pain measurements with the FPS correlated well with the VAS (r=0.873, P<0.001) and weaker with the VRS (r=0.583, P<0.001) measurements. With all scales, success rates improved during the study period.
In elderly patients, immediately after cardiac surgery, the VRS is the most feasible pain scale, followed by the RWS. The traditional 10-cm VAS is unsuitable for pain measurement in this population.
术后,视力受损和认知功能障碍的老年患者在理解标准疼痛评估工具(如10厘米视觉模拟量表(VAS)和言语评定量表(VRS))方面可能会遇到困难。因此,需要为老年患者确定更可行的术后疼痛评估方法。出于这一目的,我们将VAS和VRS与另外两种更具表现力的工具进行了比较:50厘米红色楔形量表(RWS)和面部疼痛量表(FPS)。
心脏手术患者(73±5岁,均值±标准差)被分配到RWS组(n = 80)或FPS组(n = 80)。在气管插管后的头4天,于静息状态和活动后对疼痛进行评估。10分钟后重复进行RWS或FPS评估。所有患者均完成VRS和VAS评估。
研究第1天成功进行疼痛测量的比率分别为:VRS为86%,VAS为62%,RWS为78%,FPS为60%。RWS测量的疼痛与VAS测量结果相关(r = 0.758,P < 0.001),与VRS测量结果的相关性较弱(r = 0.666,P < 0.001)。FPS测量的疼痛与VAS测量结果相关性良好(r = 0.873,P < 0.001),与VRS测量结果的相关性较弱(r = 0.583,P < 0.001)。使用所有量表时,研究期间的成功率均有所提高。
在老年患者中,心脏手术后即刻,VRS是最可行的疼痛量表,其次是RWS。传统的10厘米VAS不适用于该人群的疼痛测量。