Jensen Mark P
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Box 356490, University of Washington School of Medicine, 1959 NE Pacific, Seattle, WA 98195-6490, USA.
Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2006 Jun;10(3):159-66. doi: 10.1007/s11916-006-0041-z.
Eight measures of neuropathic pain exist that have been designed to discriminate neuropathic from non-neuropathic pain and detect treatment effects. The current paper describes these measures and summarizes the evidence supporting their validity. Based on the available evidence, the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Signs and Symptoms appears to have the most empirical support as a measure that distinguishes patients with and without neuropathic pain in patient samples presenting with mixed chronic pain problems. However, given the lack of overlap in measures designed for this purpose, it is likely that the validity of any one measure could be improved by incorporating items from the others. The Neuropathic Pain Scale (NPS) has the most empirical support as a measure of treatment outcome, although a new measure that includes the NPS items (the Pain Quality Assessment Scale) will likely prove to be even more useful, because it includes pain descriptors common to people with neuropathic and other chronic pain conditions not included on the NPS.
现有八项神经性疼痛测量方法,旨在区分神经性疼痛与非神经性疼痛,并检测治疗效果。本文介绍了这些测量方法,并总结了支持其有效性的证据。基于现有证据,在呈现混合性慢性疼痛问题的患者样本中,利兹神经性体征和症状评估似乎作为区分有无神经性疼痛患者的测量方法,得到了最多的实证支持。然而,鉴于为此目的设计的测量方法之间缺乏重叠,通过纳入其他测量方法的项目,任何一种测量方法的有效性都可能得到提高。神经性疼痛量表(NPS)作为治疗结果的测量方法,得到了最多的实证支持,不过一种包含NPS项目的新测量方法(疼痛质量评估量表)可能会被证明更有用,因为它包括了NPS未涵盖的神经性疼痛患者和其他慢性疼痛患者共有的疼痛描述词。