+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Lack of interchangeability between visual analogue and verbal rating pain scales: a cross sectional description of pain etiology groups

Lack of interchangeability between visual analogue and verbal rating pain scales: a cross sectional description of pain etiology groups

Bmc Medical Research Methodology 5: 31

Rating scales like the visual analogue scale, VAS, and the verbal rating scale, VRS, are often used for pain assessments both in clinical work and in research, despite the lack of a gold standard. Interchangeability of recorded pain intensity captured in the two scales has been discussed earlier, but not in conjunction with taking the influence of pain etiology into consideration. In this cross-sectional study, patients with their pain classified according to its etiology (chronic/idiopathic, nociceptive and neuropathic pain) were consecutively recruited for self-assessment of their actual pain intensity using a continuous VAS, 0-100, and a discrete five-category VRS. The data were analyzed with a non-parametric statistical method, suitable for comparison of scales with different numbers of response alternatives. An overlapping of the VAS records relative the VRS categories was seen in all pain groups. Cut-off positions for the VAS records related to the VRS categories were found lower in patients with nociceptive pain relative patients suffering from chronic/idiopathic and neuropathic pain. When comparing the VAS records transformed into an equidistant five-category scale with the VRS records, systematic disagreements between the scales was shown in all groups. Furthermore, in the test-retest a low percentage of the patients agreed to the same pain level on the VAS while the opposite hold for the VRS. The pain intensity assessments on VAS and VRS are in this study, not interchangeable due to overlap of pain records between the two scales, systematic disagreements when comparing the two scales and a low percentage intra-scale agreement. Furthermore, the lower VAS cut-off positions relative the VRS labels indicate different meaning of the rated pain intensity depending on pain etiology. It is also indicated that the scales have non-linear properties and that the two scales probably have different interpretation. Our findings are in favor of using the VRS in pain intensity assessments but if still the VAS is preferred, the VAS data should be analyzed as continuous using statistical methods suitable for ordinal data. Furthermore, our findings indicate a risk to over or under estimate the patient's perceived pain when interpreting condensed VAS data.

Please choose payment method:

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 049445657

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 16202149

DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-5-31

Related references

Comparison of Visual Analogue Scales (VAS) and Verbal Rating Scales (VRS) as Assessment Tools of Pain Intensity and Pain Unpleasantness. PhysioTherapy 82(11): 638-0, 1996

Studies comparing Numerical Rating Scales, Verbal Rating Scales, and Visual Analogue Scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature review. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 41(6): 1073-1093, 2011

A comparison of the Hopkins Pain Rating Instrument with standard visual analogue and verbal descriptor scales in patients with cancer pain. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 7(4): 196-203, 1992

Acceptability of visual analogue scales in the clinical setting: a comparison with verbal rating scales in postoperative pain. Methods and Findings in Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology 11(2): 123-127, 1989

A descriptive study of the use of visual analogue scales and verbal rating scales for the assessment of postoperative pain in orthopedic patients. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 18(6): 438-446, 1999

Comparability of visual analogue and verbal rating scales in measuring the pain of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis & Rheumatism 35(9 Suppl. ): S176, 1992

Problems associated with pain measurement in arthritis: comparison of the visual analogue and verbal rating scales. Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 2(3): 231-234, 1984

The Assessment of Acute Pain in Pre-Hospital Care Using Verbal Numerical Rating and Visual Analogue Scales. Journal of Emergency Medicine 49(3): 287-293, 2015

Pain measurement scales: a comparison of the visual analogue and faces rating scales in measuring pressure ulcer pain. Journal of Wound Ostomy and Continence Nursing 28(6): 290-296, 2001

Patient-controlled epidural diamorphine for post-operative pain: Verbal rating and visual analogue assessments of pain. European Journal of Anaesthesiology 13(2): 117-129, 1996

Test-retest reliability, validity, and minimum detectable change of visual analog, numerical rating, and verbal rating scales for measurement of osteoarthritic knee pain. Journal of Pain Research 11: 851-856, 2018

Evaluating postherniorrhaphy groin pain: Visual Analogue or Verbal Rating Scale?. Hernia 12(2): 147-151, 2008

Comparison of fixed interval and visual analogue scales for rating chronic pain. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 8(6): 415-420, 1975

Does pain hypervigilance further impact the lack of habituation to pain in individuals with chronic pain? A cross-sectional pain ERP study. Journal of Pain Research 11: 395-405, 2018

Comparison of verbal and visual analogue scales for measuring the intensity and unpleasantness of experimental pain. Pain 37(3): 295-304, 1989