Abstract
Background
Pain ratings are almost ubiquitous in pain assessment, but their variability is high. Low correlations of continuous/numerical rating scales with categorical scales suggest that individuals associate different sensations with the same number on a scale, jeopardizing the interpretation of statistical results. We analyzed individual conceptions of rating scales and whether these conceptions can be utilized in the analysis of ratings of experimental stimuli in pain‐free healthy individuals and people with reoccurring/persistent pain.
Methods
Using a free positioning task, healthy participants (N = 57) and people with reoccurring/persistent pain (N = 57) ad libitum positioned pain descriptors on lines representing intensity and un‐/pleasantness scales. Further, participants rated experimental thermal stimuli on visual analogue scales with the same end anchors. A latent class regression approach was used to detect subgroups with different response patterns in the free positioning task, indicating different conceptions of pain labels, and tested whether these subgroups differed in their ratings of experimental stimuli.
Results
Subgroups representing different conceptions of pain labels could be described for the intensity and the un‐/pleasantness scale with in part opposing response patterns in the free positioning task. Response patterns did not differ between people with and without pain, but in people with pain subgroups showed differential ratings of high intensity experimental stimuli.
Conclusions
Individuals’ conceptions of pain labels differ. These conceptions can be quantified and utilized to improve the analysis of ratings of experimental stimuli. Identifying subgroups with different conceptions of pain descriptions could be used to improve predictions of responses to pain in clinical contexts.
from Wiley: European Journal of Pain: Table of Contents https://ift.tt/2OXoTff
via IFTTT
No comments:
Post a Comment