skip to main content
Language:
Search Limited to: Search Limited to: Resource type Show Results with: Show Results with: Search type Index

Validation of Digital Visual Analog Scale Pain Scoring With a Traditional Paper-based Visual Analog Scale in Adults

Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews, 2018-03, Vol.2 (3), p.e088-e088 [Peer Reviewed Journal]

Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. 2018 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons ;ISSN: 2474-7661 ;EISSN: 2474-7661 ;DOI: 10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-17-00088 ;PMID: 30211382

Full text available

Citations Cited by
  • Title:
    Validation of Digital Visual Analog Scale Pain Scoring With a Traditional Paper-based Visual Analog Scale in Adults
  • Author: Delgado, Domenica A ; Lambert, Bradley S ; Boutris, Nickolas ; McCulloch, Patrick C ; Robbins, Andrew B ; Moreno, Michael R ; Harris, Joshua D
  • Is Part Of: Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews, 2018-03, Vol.2 (3), p.e088-e088
  • Description: The visual analog scale (VAS) is a validated, subjective measure for acute and chronic pain. Scores are recorded by making a handwritten mark on a 10-cm line that represents a continuum between "no pain" and "worst pain." One hundred consecutive patients aged ≥18 years who presented with a chief complaint of pain were asked to record pain scores via a paper VAS and digitally via both the laptop computer and mobile phone. Ninety-eight subjects, 51 men (age, 44 ± 16 years) and 47 women (age, 46 ± 15 years), were included. A mixed-model analysis of covariance with the Bonferroni post hoc test was used to detect differences between the paper and digital VAS scores. A Bland-Altman analysis was used to test for instrument agreement between the platforms. The minimal clinically important difference was set at 1.4 cm (14% of total scale length) for detecting clinical relevance between the three VAS platforms. A paired one-tailed Student -test was used to determine whether differences between the digital and paper measurement platforms exceeded 14% ( < 0.05). A significant difference in scores was found between the mobile phone-based (32.9% ± 0.4%) and both the laptop computer- and paper-based platforms (31.0% ± 0.4%, < 0.01 for both). These differences were not clinically relevant (minimal clinically important difference <1.4 cm). No statistically significant difference was observed between the paper and laptop computer platforms. Measurement agreement was found between the paper- and laptop computer-based platforms (mean difference, 0.0% ± 0.5%; no proportional bias detected) but not between the paper- and mobile phone-based platforms (mean difference, 1.9% ± 0.5%; proportional bias detected). No clinically relevant difference exists between the traditional paper-based VAS assessment and VAS scores obtained from laptop computer- and mobile phone-based platforms.
  • Publisher: United States: Wolters Kluwer
  • Language: English
  • Identifier: ISSN: 2474-7661
    EISSN: 2474-7661
    DOI: 10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-17-00088
    PMID: 30211382
  • Source: Open Access: PubMed Central
    Journals@Ovid Open Access Journal Collection Rolling
    DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
Back to results list
INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY (84-028) 37 755 057 Feedback
19 Nguyen Huu Tho St. Dist.7, HCM thuvien@tdtu.edu.vn

Copyright © 2017 INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY

Searching Remote Databases, Please Wait