+ 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

The Assessment of Acute Pain in Pre-Hospital Care Using Verbal Numerical Rating and Visual Analogue Scales



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



Prehospital care (PHC) pain evaluation is an essential patient assessment to be performed by paramedics. Pain intensity is frequently assessed using Verbal Numerical Rating Scale (VNRS) or Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Our aim was to evaluate the agreement between VNRS and VAS in measuring acute pain in prehospital setting and to identify the preference among paramedics and patients. This was a 3-month cross-sectional study. Convenience sampling was used to enroll patients with acute pain responded to by the ambulance team. Data from consented patients were analyzed using Bland-Altman method, Spearman's correlation test, and Cohen's κ test. One hundred and thirty-three patients participated in this study (median age 32 years; 72.2% male). The median for pain score at the scene was 7.50 (interquartile range [IQR]: 5.00) for VAS and 7.00 (IQR: 5.00) for VNRS. The median for pain score on arrival at the hospital was 7.00 (IQR: 3.10) for VAS and 7.00 (IQR: 4.00) for VNRS. There was a strong correlation between VNRS and VAS at the scene (r = 0.865; p < 0.001), as well as on arrival at the hospital (r = 0.933; p < 0.001). Kappa coefficient values and Bland-Altman analysis indicates good agreement between both scales for measuring acute pain. VNRS was the preferred method to measure acute pain by patients and paramedics. VAS performs as well as VNRS in assessing acute pain in PHC. VAS and VNRS must not be used interchangeably to assess acute pain; either method should be used consistently.

Please choose payment method:






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

Accession: 058991651

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 26022936

DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2015.02.043


Related references

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

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

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

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

The end of the line? The Visual Analogue Scale and Verbal Numerical Rating Scale as pain assessment tools in the emergency department. Emergency Medicine Journal 27(5): 372-375, 2010

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, 2005

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

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

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

Repeatability and comparison of visual analogue and numerical rating scales in the assessment of visual quality. Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics 17(6): 492-498, 1997

Repeatability and comparison of visual analogue and numerical rating scales in the assessment of visual quality. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics 17(6): 492-498, 1997

A comparison of pain measurement characteristics of mechanical visual analogue and simple numerical rating scales. Pain. 56(2): 217-226, 1994

Verbal numerical scales are as reliable and sensitive as visual analog scales for rating dyspnea in young and older subjects. Respiratory Physiology and Neurobiology 157(2-3): 360-365, 2007

Repeatability and reproducibility of numerical rating scales and visual analogue scales for canine pruritus severity scoring. Veterinary Dermatology 18(5): 294-300, 2007