Jensen Mark P, Karoly Paul, Braver Sanford
Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287 U.S.A.
Pain. 1986 Oct;27(1):117-126. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(86)90228-9.
The measurement of subjective pain intensity continues to be important to both researchers and clinicians. Although several scales are currently used to assess the intensity construct, it remains unclear which of these provides the most precise, replicable, and predictively valid measure. Five criteria for judging intensity scales have been considered in previous research: ease of administration of scoring; relative rates of incorrect responding; sensitivity as defined by the number of available response categories; sensitivity as defined by statistical power; and the magnitude of the relationship between each scale and a linear combination of pain intensity indices. In order to judge commonly used pain intensity measures, 75 chronic pain patients were asked to rate 4 kinds of pain (present, least, most, and average) using 6 scales. The utility and validity of the scales was judged using the criteria listed above. The results indicate that, for the present sample, the scales yield similar results in terms of the number of subjects who respond correctly to them and their predictive validity. However, when considering the remaining 3 criteria, the 101-point numerical rating scale appears to be the most practical index.
主观疼痛强度的测量对研究人员和临床医生而言都依然很重要。尽管目前有几种量表用于评估强度指标，但仍不清楚其中哪一种能提供最精确、可重复且具有预测效度的测量。先前的研究考虑了判断强度量表的五个标准：评分的易于实施程度；错误回答的相对比例；由可用反应类别数量定义的敏感性；由统计功效定义的敏感性；以及每个量表与疼痛强度指标线性组合之间关系的大小。为了评判常用的疼痛强度测量方法，75名慢性疼痛患者被要求使用6种量表对4种疼痛（当前疼痛、最轻疼痛、最痛疼痛和平均疼痛）进行评分。使用上述标准来评判这些量表的效用和效度。结果表明，对于当前样本，就正确对量表做出反应的受试者数量及其预测效度而言，这些量表得出了相似的结果。然而，在考虑其余3个标准时，101点数字评定量表似乎是最实用的指标。
