Hogans Beth B, Siaton Bernadette C, Sorkin John D
Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, VA Maryland Health Care System, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Department of Neurology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Pain Rep. 2025 Aug 7;10(5):e1322. doi: 10.1097/PR9.0000000000001322. eCollection 2025 Oct.
The Numerical Rating Scale is widely used for patient-reported appraisals of pain intensity; however, scale properties have limited utility for assessing chronic pain. Specifically, single pain ratings demonstrate high intraindividual variability. We propose an efficient alternative, termed hurdle analysis, separately analyzing zero and nonzero pain ratings.
This retrospective study of 23,480 US Veterans diagnosed with low back pain (LBP) included 2.1 million unique pain ratings. Marginal distributions comprised of all pain ratings for each individual were parametrized with usual and hurdle analysis methods to holistically assess scale utilization.
The population was 87% male and 13% female; 41% Black, 38% White, and 2% Hispanic; modal age range was 65 years to 84 years (45 years-64 years) for men (women). Focusing on statistically informative records, ie, those with ≥100 pain ratings (22% of the total), the median [interquartile range] pain rating was 3.5 [2.3-4.7] (4.0 [3.0-5.1]) for men (women). Marginal distributions were non-normal, with zero being the modal value in 79% (73%) of men (women). In hurdle analysis, the average proportion of zeroes was 0.39 (0.31) for men (women); the average nonzero pain rating was 5.9 [5.1-6.6] (6.0 [5.3-6.7]) for men (women). The nonzero averages, in contrast to standard averages, were normally distributed for the population and compared with data showed less bias and variance.
Analysis of clinical pain ratings from Veterans with LBP with hurdle analysis yielded improved estimates of pain when-pain-is-present (ie, nonzero pain) and also demonstrated the variable presence of pain in this population. Further study of this approach appears warranted.
数字评分量表被广泛用于患者报告的疼痛强度评估;然而,该量表属性在评估慢性疼痛方面的效用有限。具体而言,单次疼痛评分显示出较高的个体内变异性。我们提出一种有效的替代方法,称为障碍分析,分别分析零疼痛评分和非零疼痛评分。
这项对23480名被诊断为腰痛(LBP)的美国退伍军人的回顾性研究包括210万个独特的疼痛评分。用常规和障碍分析方法对每个个体的所有疼痛评分组成的边缘分布进行参数化,以全面评估量表的使用情况。
该人群中男性占87%,女性占13%;41%为黑人,38%为白人,2%为西班牙裔;男性(女性)的典型年龄范围是65岁至84岁(45岁至64岁)。关注具有统计学意义的记录,即那些有≥100次疼痛评分的记录(占总数的22%),男性(女性)的疼痛评分中位数[四分位间距]为3.5[2.3 - 4.7](4.0[3.0 - 5.1])。边缘分布呈非正态,男性(女性)中79%(73%)的模态值为零。在障碍分析中,男性(女性)的零值平均比例为0.39(0.31);男性(女性)的非零疼痛评分平均值为5.9[5.1 - 6.6](6.0[5.3 - 6.7])。与标准平均值相比,非零平均值在总体中呈正态分布,并且与数据相比显示出较小的偏差和方差。
对患有LBP的退伍军人的临床疼痛评分进行障碍分析,在疼痛存在时(即非零疼痛)能更好地估计疼痛情况,并且还表明了该人群中疼痛存在的变异性。对这种方法进行进一步研究似乎是有必要的。