Gomez-Eslava Barbara, Raasveld Floris V, Hoftiezer Yannick A J, McCarty Justin C, Daddario Jenna L, Valerio Ian L, Heng Marilyn, Eberlin Kyle R
From the Hand and Arm Center, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery.
Department of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Hand Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2024 May 1;153(5):1162-1171. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010762. Epub 2023 May 26.
Numeric scales are validated methods to report pain outcomes after targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR) but do not include the assessment of qualitative pain components. This study evaluates the application of pain sketches within a cohort of patients undergoing primary TMR and describes differences in pain progression according to early postoperative sketches.
This study included 30 patients with major limb amputation and primary TMR. Patients' drawings were categorized into four categories of pain distribution [focal pain (FP), radiating pain (RP), diffuse pain (DP), or no pain (NP)] and interrater reliability was calculated. Second, pain outcomes were analyzed for each category. Pain scores were the primary outcome, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) instruments were the secondary outcome.
The interrater reliability for the sketch categories was good (overall kappa coefficient of 0.8). The NP category reported a mean decrease in pain of 4.8 points, followed by the DP (2.5 points) and FP categories (2.0 points). The RP category reported a mean increase in pain of 0.5 points. For PROMIS Pain Interference and Pain Intensity, the DP category reported a mean decrease of 7.2 and 6.5 points, respectively, followed by the FP category (5.3 and 3.6 points). The RP category reported a mean increase of 2.0 points in PROMIS Pain Interference and a mean decrease of 1.4 points in PROMIS Pain Intensity. Secondary outcomes for the NP category were not reported.
Pain sketches demonstrated reliability in pain morphology assessment and might be an adjunctive tool for pain interpretation in this setting.
数字评分量表是用于报告靶向肌肉再支配(TMR)后疼痛结果的有效方法,但未包括对疼痛定性成分的评估。本研究评估了疼痛草图在接受初次TMR的患者队列中的应用,并根据术后早期草图描述了疼痛进展的差异。
本研究纳入了30例接受大肢体截肢和初次TMR的患者。患者的绘图被分为四类疼痛分布[局灶性疼痛(FP)、放射性疼痛(RP)、弥漫性疼痛(DP)或无疼痛(NP)],并计算了评分者间信度。其次,对每类疼痛结果进行分析。疼痛评分是主要结果,患者报告结局测量信息系统(PROMIS)工具是次要结果。
草图类别的评分者间信度良好(总体kappa系数为0.8)。NP类别报告疼痛平均降低4.8分,其次是DP(2.5分)和FP类别(2.0分)。RP类别报告疼痛平均增加0.5分。对于PROMIS疼痛干扰和疼痛强度,DP类别分别报告平均降低7.2分和6.5分,其次是FP类别(5.3分和3.6分)。RP类别报告PROMIS疼痛干扰平均增加2.0分,PROMIS疼痛强度平均降低1.4分。未报告NP类别的次要结果。
疼痛草图在疼痛形态学评估中显示出可靠性,可能是这种情况下疼痛解读的辅助工具。