Dalarna University's logo and link to the university's website

du.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • chicago-author-date
  • chicago-note-bibliography
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Pain rating in the ED—a comparison between 2 scales in a Swedish hospital
Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4062-4470
Show others and affiliations
2015 (English)In: American Journal of Emergency Medicine, ISSN 0735-6757, E-ISSN 1532-8171, Vol. 33, no 3, p. 419-422Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Abstract Background Pain is common at an emergency department (ED). Two common scales used to rate intensity are the visual analog scale (VAS) and the numeric rating scale (NRS), but it remains unknown which is superior to use in the ED. Aim The aim of the study is to compare correlations between values on the VAS and the NRS in patients visiting the ED as well as to assess the patients' preference of scale. Methods Patients who visited the ED due to chest pain, abdominal pain, or an orthopedic condition during autumn 2012 were enrolled onto a cross-sectional study with a consecutive sample. Patients rated their pain using the VAS and NRS scales. They answered an open-ended oral questionnaire regarding their preference and their estimation of the sufficiency of the scales. Data were analyzed with significance test. Results In all, 217 patients (70% of eligible, 94% of invited) participated. The pain scores generated from the NRS and the VAS were found to strongly correlate (mean difference, 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.53). Most patients found the NRS easier to use than the VAS (61% and 22%, respectively; P < .001). Furthermore, a majority reported that the NRS reflected/described their pain better than the VAS (53% and 26%, respectively; P < .01). Conclusion Because values on the NRS correspond well to values on the VAS, values rated with different scales over time might be comparable. Because a majority of the patients found the NRS scale simpler to use and preferred it over the VAS, it might be more appropriate to use in the ED.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier Inc , 2015. Vol. 33, no 3, p. 419-422
Keywords [en]
Emergency ; Abdominal Pain - diagnosis ; Emergency Service, Hospital ; Musculoskeletal Pain - diagnosis ; Pain Measurement - instrumentation ; Prospective Studies ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Humans ; Middle Aged ; Male ; Patient Preference ; Sweden ; Adult ; Female ; Aged ; Chest Pain - diagnosis ; Cohort Studies ; Index Medicus ; Medicin och hälsovetenskap
National Category
Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:du-36994DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2014.12.069OAI: oai:DiVA.org:du-36994DiVA, id: diva2:1556889
Conference
United States
Available from: 2021-05-24 Created: 2021-05-24 Last updated: 2021-05-24Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records

Göransson, Katarina

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Göransson, Katarina
In the same journal
American Journal of Emergency Medicine
Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 11 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • chicago-author-date
  • chicago-note-bibliography
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf