首页> 外文期刊>Current medical research and opinion >Paper versus electronic rating scales for pain assessment: a prospective, randomised, cross-over validation study with 200 chronic pain patients.
【24h】

Paper versus electronic rating scales for pain assessment: a prospective, randomised, cross-over validation study with 200 chronic pain patients.

机译:用于疼痛评估的纸质评分表与电子评分表:一项针对200名慢性疼痛患者的前瞻性,随机,交叉验证研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: Following the recent introduction of hand-held computers to be used by patients instead of conventional pencil-and-paper questionnaires, a validation study under 'real-life' conditions was conducted, in order to compare these two clinical instruments when used by chronic pain patients to describe their pain using visual and numerical rating scales. METHOD: Each of 200 chronic pain patients attending a single physician's practice was given two pain questionnaires to complete, one on paper and one on a hand-held computer; completion of these took place directly before and after consultation, in randomised order. The questions asked in the two questionnaires were identical: present pain, average pain, worst pain and those of the painDETECT questionnaire (the latter distinguishes characteristic symptoms of nociceptive pain). In accordance with standard practice, the paper questionnaire used numerical rating scales and the electronic one employed visual analogue scales, with or without a numerical indicator. RESULTS: Nearly all patients (99%) of the study population (58% female; aged 57+/-14 years) completed both questionnaires. In spite of the expected substantial intra-individual scatter, overall results from the two questionnaire types were highly consistent. Only a few differences of potential statistical significance (p<5%) were observed, and none were found that would have led to different interpretations. No difference was seen between results from the electronic visual analogue scales with and without a numerical indicator. CONCLUSION: Under conditions of routine clinical practice, the hand-held computer questionnaire can give results equivalent to those obtained with the conventional paper questionnaire.
机译:目的:在最近介绍了供患者使用的手持计算机而不是传统的铅笔和纸质问卷之后,进行了在“真实”条件下的验证研究,以便比较供患者使用的这两种临床工具慢性疼痛患者使用视觉和数字评分量表来描述他们的疼痛。方法:每位接受单一医师诊治的200名慢性疼痛患者均接受两份疼痛问卷的填写,一份为纸质,另一份为手持计算机。这些工作的完成是在咨询前后直接按照随机顺序进行的。在两个问卷中提出的问题是相同的:目前的疼痛,平均疼痛,最严重的疼痛和painDETECT问卷(后者区分伤害性疼痛的特征性症状)。按照标准惯例,纸质问卷使用数字评分量表,电子问卷使用视觉模拟量表,带有或不带有数字指示器。结果:研究人群中几乎所有患者(99%)(女性58%;年龄57 +/- 14岁)均填写了两个问卷。尽管预期会有大量的个人内部分散,但两种问卷类型的总体结果还是高度一致的。仅观察到了潜在的统计学显着性差异(p <5%),没有发现会导致不同的解释。有和没有数字指示符的电子视觉模拟量表的结果之间没有发现差异。结论:在常规临床实践条件下,手持计算机问卷可以提供与常规纸质问卷相同的结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号