Suppr超能文献

比较数字评分量表、语言评分量表和视觉模拟量表评估成人疼痛强度的研究:系统文献回顾。

Studies comparing Numerical Rating Scales, Verbal Rating Scales, and Visual Analogue Scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature review.

机构信息

Regional Center for Excellence in Palliative Care, Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital-Ullevål, Oslo, Norway.

出版信息

J Pain Symptom Manage. 2011 Jun;41(6):1073-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2010.08.016.

Abstract

CONTEXT

The use of unidimensional pain scales such as the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Verbal Rating Scale (VRS), or Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) is recommended for assessment of pain intensity (PI). A literature review of studies specifically comparing the NRS, VRS, and/or VAS for unidimensional self-report of PI was performed as part of the work of the European Palliative Care Research Collaborative on pain assessment.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the use and performance of unidimensional pain scales, with specific emphasis on the NRSs.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed, including citations through April 2010. All abstracts were evaluated by two persons according to specified criteria.

RESULTS

Fifty-four of 239 papers were included. Postoperative PI was most frequently studied; six studies were in cancer. Eight versions of the NRS (NRS-6 to NRS-101) were used in 37 studies; a total of 41 NRSs were tested. Twenty-four different descriptors (15 for the NRSs) were used to anchor the extremes. When compared with the VAS and VRS, NRSs had better compliance in 15 of 19 studies reporting this, and were the recommended tool in 11 studies on the basis of higher compliance rates, better responsiveness and ease of use, and good applicability relative to VAS/VRS. Twenty-nine studies gave no preference. Many studies showed wide distributions of NRS scores within each category of the VRSs. Overall, NRS and VAS scores corresponded, with a few exceptions of systematically higher VAS scores.

CONCLUSION

NRSs are applicable for unidimensional assessment of PI in most settings. Whether the variability in anchors and response options directly influences the numerical scores needs to be empirically tested. This will aid in the work toward a consensus-based, standardized measure.

摘要

背景

建议使用一维疼痛量表,如数字评分量表(NRS)、言语评分量表(VRS)或视觉模拟量表(VAS)来评估疼痛强度(PI)。作为欧洲姑息治疗研究协作组疼痛评估工作的一部分,对专门比较 NRS、VRS 和/或 VAS 用于一维自我报告 PI 的研究进行了文献回顾。

目的

调查一维疼痛量表的使用和性能,特别强调 NRS。

方法

进行了系统搜索,包括截至 2010 年 4 月的引文。根据指定标准,由两个人评估所有摘要。

结果

在 239 篇论文中,有 54 篇被纳入。术后 PI 是最常研究的;有 6 项研究针对癌症患者。在 37 项研究中使用了 8 种 NRS(NRS-6 至 NRS-101);共测试了 41 个 NRS。24 种不同的描述符(NRS 有 15 种)用于锚定极端情况。与 VAS 和 VRS 相比,在报告了这一点的 19 项研究中的 15 项研究中,NRS 的依从性更好,并且在 11 项研究中被推荐为工具,因为它们的依从率更高、响应性更好、使用更方便,并且与 VAS/VRS 相比具有更好的适用性。29 项研究未给出偏好。许多研究表明,NRS 评分在 VRS 各类别内的分布很广。总体而言,NRS 和 VAS 评分是一致的,只有少数例外是 VAS 评分系统偏高。

结论

NRS 适用于大多数情况下的 PI 一维评估。锚定和反应选项的变异性是否直接影响数值评分需要通过实证检验。这将有助于朝着基于共识的标准化测量方法努力。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验