Objective-To determine whether minimum clinically significant diVerence in visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score varies according to the severity of pain reported. Method-Prospective descriptive study of adult patients in an urban emergency department (ED). On presentation to the ED, patients marked the level of their pain on a 100 mm, non-hatched VAS scale. At 20 minute intervals thereafter they were asked to give a verbal categorical rating of their pain as "a lot better", "a little better", "much the same", "a little worse" or "much worse" and to mark the level of pain on a VAS scale of the same type as used previously. It was pre-defined that patients with VAS pain scores of 30 mm or less would be categorised as having mild pain, those with scores of 70 mm or more were categorised as having severe pain and those from 31 mm to 69 mm, moderate pain. The minimal clinically significant diVerence (MCSD) in VAS pain score was defined as the mean diVerence between current and preceding scores when the subject reported "a little worse" or "a little better" pain. Results-156 patients were enrolled in the study, yielding 88 evaluable comparisons where pain was rated as "a little better" or "a little worse". The MCSD in VAS score in the group overall was 12 mm (95%CI 9 mm to 15 mm). MCSD in VAS score for the "mild pain" group was 11 mm (95%CI 4 mm to 18 mm), for the "moderate pain" group 14 mm (95%CI 10 mm to 18 mm) and for the severe pain group, 10 mm (95%CI 6 mm to 14 mm). There is no statistical diVerence between the MCSD in VAS score between the severity groups. Conclusions-The MCSD in VAS pain score does not diVer with the severity of pain being experienced.

This study aimed to investigate outcome in adults with mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) at 1 week and 3 months postinjury and to identify factors associated with persisting problems. A total of 84 adults with mild TBI were compared with 53 adults with other minor injuries as controls in terms of postconcussional symptomatology, behavior, and cognitive performance at 1 week and 3 months postinjury. At 1 week postinjury, adults with mild TBI were reporting symptoms, particularly headaches, dizziness, fatigue, visual disturbance, and memory difficulties. They exhibited slowing of information processing on neuropsychological measures, namely the WAIS–R Digit Symbol subtest and the Speed of Comprehension Test. By 3 months postinjury, the symptoms reported at 1 week had largely resolved, and no impairments were evident on neuropsychological measures. However, there was a subgroup of 24% of participants who were still suffering many symptoms, who were highly distressed, and whose lives were still significantly disrupted. These individuals did not have longer posttraumatic amnesia (PTA) duration. They were more likely to have a history of previous head injury, neurological or psychiatric problems, to be students, females, and to have been injured in a motor vehicle accident. The majority were showing significant levels of psychopathology. A range of factors, other than those directly reflecting the severity of injury, appear to be associated with outcome following mild TBI. (JINS, 2000, 6, 568–579.)

The aim of this study was to determine the extent of correlation and agreement between arterial oxygen saturation and oxygen saturation as recorded by transcutaneous pulse oximetry, with a view to identifying whether pulse oximetry can be used as an alternative to arterial values in the clinical management of patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive airways disease (COAD) in the emergency department. It also aims to determine whether there is a cut-off level of oxygen saturation by pulse oximetry that can screen for significant systemic hypoxia in this group. This prospective study of patients with acute exacerbations of COAD who were deemed by their treating doctor to require an arterial blood gas analysis to determine their ventilatory status, compared arterial oxygen saturation with simultaneously recorded oxygen saturation measured by transcutaneous pulse oximetry. Data were analysed using Pearson correlation, bias plot (Bland-Altman) methods for agreement and the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve method for determination of a screening cut-off. Sixty-four sample-pairs were analysed for this study. Nine (14%) had significant hypoxia (arterial PO2 less than 60 mmHg). The correlation coefficient was 0.91. The bias (Bland-Altman) plot shows a constant bias of -0.758% and only fair agreement, with 95% limits for agreement of -8.2 to + 6.7%. With respect to the ROC curve analysis, the 'best' cut-off for detection of hypoxia was at oxygen saturation by pulse oximetry of 92% (sensitivity 100%, specificity 86%). In conclusion, there is not sufficient agreement for oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry to replace analysis of an arterial blood gas sample in the clinical evaluation of oxygenation in emergency patients with COAD. However, oxygen saturation by pulse oximetry may be an effective screening test for systemic hypoxia, with the screening cut-off of 92% having sensitivity for the detection of systemic hypoxia of 100% with specificity of 86%.

No abstract