An experimental basis for revising the graphic rating scale for pain

Abstract

Seven subjects judged the differences between electrocutaneous shocks and words from two category rating lists describing those sensations in each of two differences estimation experiments. The electrocutaneous shocks used for the two experiments were 10 suprathreshold shock intensities determined separately for each subject. There were two distinct 7-word category rating lists. Both lists shared 6 common words; however, the seventh word made the rational ordering of the two lists different. Magnitude scales of meaning for the category rating words and sensory scales for the electrocutaneous shock intensities were determined for each of the two experiments for each subject using conjoint measurement analysis. Comparisons of the sensory scales for electrocutaneous shock between the two difference estimation experiments for each subject showed that they judged the electrocutaneous shocks similarly with the two words lists. This allowed for comparisons between the scales of meaning for the words from the category rating lists. The two word lists were not equivalent. There was substantial agreement among the subjects on characteristic spacings of quantitative values for the category rating items. These results suggest that clinical ratings scales used for analgesimetry should not assume homogeneity of spacing of category items. A scale incorporating our subjects' common understanding is presented.

Comparative Efficacy of 2 Topical Anesthetics for the Placement of Orthodontic Temporary Anchorage Devices

“…Subjects were familiarized with the use of a Heft-Parker visual analogue scale 25 (VAS) pain assessment instrument at the placement appointment. A baseline VAS score was taken preoperatively to quantitatively ensure that subjects were not in pain prior to the procedure, and to obtain information on the comparability/consistency of pain evaluations across the 2 groups.…”

Maxillary Posterior Teeth Removal Without Palatal Injection –Truth or Myth: A Dilemma for Oral Surgeons

“…Although Visual Analogue Scale may show deficiencies regarding understanding and perception, it provides a validated and meaningful measure of anaesthetic efficiency [26].…”

Evaluating the Analgesic Efficacy of Solanum surattense (Herbal Seed Extract) in Relieving Pulpal Pain-An In-vivo Study

“…Also, there are few reports in the role of tannins and patients in the experimental group had pain relief after usage of the experimental mouth rinse (Table 1). There was no statistical significance in the initial HP-VAS [9] scores between the two groups (Unpaired 't' test). When comparing the VAS scores of pre and post-rinse within each group (Paired 't' test), high level of significance was observed at p=0.000 (Table 2).…”

“…Coloured distilled water served as control. The intensity of pain after rinsing was again recorded using HP-VAS [9] scale.The HP-VAS [9] scores were tabulated. The data showed normal distribution and analysed statistically using paired (Intra group comparison) and unpaired 't' tests (Inter group comparison) at 5% significance.…”

“…Coloured distilled water served as control. The intensity of pain after rinsing was again recorded using HP-VAS [9] scale.…”