Accuracy of the pain numeric rating scale as a screening test in primary care

被引:328
作者
Krebs, Erin E.
Carey, Timothy S.
Weinberger, Morris
机构
[1] Roudebush VAMC, Ctr Implementing Evidence Based Practice, Indianapolis, IN 46202 USA
[2] Regenstrief Inst Inc, Ctr Hlth Serv & Outcomes Res, Indianapolis, IN USA
[3] Indiana Univ, Sch Med, Dept Med, Indianapolis, IN 46204 USA
[4] Univ N Carolina, Cecil G Sheps Ctr Hlth Serv Res, Chapel Hill, NC 27515 USA
[5] Univ N Carolina, Sch Med, Dept Med, Chapel Hill, NC 27515 USA
[6] Univ N Carolina, Sch Publ Hlth, Hlth Policy & Adm, Chapel Hill, NC 27515 USA
[7] Durham Vet Affairs Med Ctr, Ctr Hlth Serv Res Primary Care, Durham, NC USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
primary health care; pain; screening; sensitivity and specificity;
D O I
10.1007/s11606-007-0321-2
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
BACKGROUND: Universal pain screening with a 0-10 pain intensity numeric rating scale (NRS) has been widely implemented in primary care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of the NRS as a screening test to identify primary care patients with clinically important pain. DESIGN: Prospective diagnostic accuracy study PARTICIPANTS: 275 adult clinic patients were enrolled from September 2005 to March 2006. MEASUREMENTS: We operationalized clinically important pain using two alternate definitions: (1) pain that interferes with functioning (Brief Pain Inventory interference scale >= 5) and (2) pain that motivates a physician visit (patient-reported reason for the visit). RESULTS: 22% of patients reported a pain symptom as the main reason for the visit. The most common pain locations were lower extremity (21%) and back/neck (18%). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve for the NRS as a test for pain that interferes with functioning was 0.76, indicating fair accuracy. A pain screening NRS score of 1 was 69% sensitive (95% CI 60-78) for pain that interferes with functioning. Multilevel likelihood ratios for scores of 0, 1-3, 4-6, and 7-10 were 0.39 (0.29-0.53), 0.99 (0.38-2.60), 2.67 (1.56-4.57), and 5.60 (3.06-10.26), respectively. Results were similar when NRS scores were evaluated against the alternate definition of clinically important pain (pain that motivates a physician visit). CONCLUSIONS: The most commonly used measure for pain screening may have only modest accuracy for identifying patients with clinically important pain in primary care. Further research is needed to evaluate whether pain screening improves patient outcomes in primary care.
引用
收藏
页码:1453 / 1458
页数:6
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1991, CLIN EPIDEMIOL
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1996, Guide to Clinical Preventive Services, V2nd
[3]  
[Anonymous], PAIN 5 VIT SIGN TOOL
[4]  
Cleeland C., 1991, EFFECT CANC QUALITY, P296, DOI DOI 10.1201/9781003068648-21
[5]   Core outcome measures for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations [J].
Dworkin, RH ;
Turk, DC ;
Farrar, JT ;
Haythornthwaite, JA ;
Jensen, MP ;
Katz, NP ;
Kerns, RD ;
Stucki, G ;
Allen, RR ;
Bellamy, N ;
Carr, DB ;
Chandler, J ;
Cowan, P ;
Dionne, R ;
Galer, BS ;
Hertz, S ;
Jadad, AR ;
Kramer, LD ;
Manning, DC ;
Martin, S ;
McCormick, CG ;
McDermott, MP ;
McGrath, P ;
Quessy, S ;
Rappaport, BA ;
Robbins, W ;
Robinson, JP ;
Rothman, M ;
Royal, MA ;
Simon, L ;
Stauffer, JW ;
Stein, W ;
Tollett, J ;
Wernicke, J ;
Witter, J .
PAIN, 2005, 113 (1-2) :9-19
[6]   Categorising the severity of neck pain: Establishment of cut-points for use in clinical and epidemiological research [J].
Fejer, R ;
Jordan, A ;
Hartvigsen, J .
PAIN, 2005, 119 (1-3) :176-182
[7]  
Fletcher R.H., 1996, CLIN EPIDEMIOLOGY ES, V3rd
[8]  
FOX JD, 2002, JOINT COMMISSION PAI, V12
[9]   A cross-national study of the course of persistent pain in primary care [J].
Gureje, O ;
Simon, GE ;
Von Korff, M .
PAIN, 2001, 92 (1-2) :195-200
[10]   Comparative reliability and validity of chronic pain intensity measures [J].
Jensen, MP ;
Turner, JA ;
Romano, JM ;
Fisher, LD .
PAIN, 1999, 83 (02) :157-162