Department of Surgical Specialties and Anesthesiology, Botucatu Medical School, São Paulo State University (Unesp), Botucatu, SP, Brazil.
Department of Surgical Specialties and Anesthesiology, Botucatu Medical School, São Paulo State University (Unesp), Botucatu, SP, Brazil.
Vet Anaesth Analg. 2024 Sep-Oct;51(5):548-557. doi: 10.1016/j.vaa.2024.06.010. Epub 2024 Jun 27.
To evaluate if students without training assess pain similarly to an expert, and to compare indications for analgesic intervention based on student opinions versus scale scoring.
Prospective, blind, randomized, cross-sectional study.
Video recordings of a bull, horse, cat, pig and sheep.
First-year veterinary medicine students assessed one video of a horse (n = 44) and one video of a bull (n = 39). Third-year veterinary medicine students assessed one video of a cat (n = 23) and one video of a pig (n = 21). Fourth-year animal science students (n = 16) assessed one video of a sheep. The species assessed by different student classes were determined randomly. Students were unaware of animal history or existing pain assessment and decided whether they would provide analgesia according to their opinion. They then scored each video using species-specific validated pain scales. Scores were compared with those of a board-certified anesthesiologist (expert). Chi-square test was used to compare students and expert.
Students underestimated the expert's score by 8-20%, except for the horse. There was no difference between the analgesic indication according to the assessment of the expert (143/143, 100%) and students (141/143, 98.6%) considering the defined analgesic intervention threshold for each scale (p = 0.478). The indication for analgesic intervention according to students' opinion (116/143, 81.1%) was lower than that according to their scale scores (141/143, 98.6%) (p < 0.0001).
Students tended to underestimate pain; however, they detected pain that requires analgesic intervention in animals similarly to an expert. The use of scales optimized the indication for providing analgesia when animals were experiencing pain that required analgesic intervention.
评估未经培训的学生是否能像专家一样评估疼痛，并比较基于学生意见与量表评分的镇痛干预指征。
前瞻性、盲法、随机、横断面研究。
牛、马、猫、猪和羊的视频录像。
一年级兽医专业学生评估了一段马的录像（n=44）和一段牛的录像（n=39）。三年级兽医专业学生评估了一段猫的录像（n=23）和一段猪的录像（n=21）。四年级动物科学专业学生（n=16）评估了一段羊的录像。不同学生班级评估的物种是随机确定的。学生不知道动物的病史或现有的疼痛评估情况，并根据自己的意见决定是否提供镇痛。然后，他们使用特定物种的验证疼痛量表对每个视频进行评分。评分与经过委员会认证的麻醉师（专家）的评分进行比较。采用卡方检验比较学生和专家的评分。
学生对专家评分的低估率为 8%-20%，除了马。根据每个量表定义的镇痛干预阈值，专家（143/143，100%）和学生（141/143，98.6%）的镇痛指征无差异（p=0.478）。根据学生意见（116/143，81.1%）的镇痛干预指征低于根据量表评分（141/143，98.6%）（p<0.0001）。
学生往往低估疼痛，但他们能像专家一样检测到需要镇痛干预的动物疼痛。在动物出现需要镇痛干预的疼痛时，使用量表可以优化提供镇痛的指征。
