Abbonarsi

Measuring the minimum clinically significant difference in acute pain: Etiology, direction, and time of assessment - 25/08/11

Doi : 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.07.288 
O. Karcioglu, V. Degerli, G.L. Larkin, S. Karaduman
Dokuz Eylul University School of Medicine, Izmir, Turkey; Parkland Memorial Hospital, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX 

286

Abstract

Study objectives: We determine the minimum clinically significant difference (MCSD) in visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores for acute thoracoabdominal pain in the emergency department (ED) and identify demographic, clinical, and time factors affecting this value. This was a prospective observational cohort study at a university-based ED. Participants were consecutive adult patients with acute thoracoabdominal pain.

Methods: Patients marked the level of their pain on a 100-mm VAS at baseline and at 20-minute intervals thereafter. Simultaneously, patients were asked to rate their pain as “much less,” “a little less,” “about the same,” “a little more,” or “much more” while also marking the level of pain on a VAS. MCSD was defined as the mean difference between current and preceding VAS scores when a patient reported pain as “a little less pain” or “a little more” compared with the previous rating.

Results: Three hundred six patients were enrolled, and 376 pain contrasts were rated as “a little less” and 52 as “a little more” pain. The MCSD overall in this sample was calculated as 24.2 mm (95% confidence interval 22.6 to 25.7 mm). However, at 20 minutes, the mean MCSD for “a little more” pain (17.1±7.4) was significantly lower than the absolute value of the mean VAS change for “a little less” pain (27.1±17.0; P=.02). The MCSD for “a little less” pain at 60 minutes (Tables 1 and 2) was significantly lower than “a little less” pain at the 20-minute interval (22.1 versus 27.1 mm, respectively; P=.01).

Conclusion: The MCSD for patients with thoracoabdominal pain in this Turkish sample was 24.2 mm. The MCSD varied as a function of etiology and assessment period. “A little less” pain represented greater changes in VAS than “a little more” pain in this population.
Table 1, abstract 28660-Minute VAS scores and mean differences in 60-minute and MCSD values in various diagnostic groups in the ED.Final ED DiagnosesNo. (%)Mean VAS at 60 Min, mm (SD)Mean Difference in VAS in 60 Min, mm (SD)†MCSD, mm (SD)‡Renal colic59 (19.3)15.0 (22.9)−61.3 (28.4)25.2 (25.8)Gastroenteritis28 (9.2)14.7 (15.6)−43.7 (28.4)19.7 (21.7)Nonspecific abdominal pain11 (37.9)18.6 (26.1)−44.6 (31.1)18.9 (20.9)Acute abdomen31 (10.1)38.2 (26.4)−32.0 (35.2)15.5 (22.4)Low back pain17 (5.6)28.3 (25.3)−41.3 (28.7)15.2 (19.6)Coronary artery disease21 (6.9)19.4 (27.1)−50.2 (28.4)20.2 (21.5)Urinary tract infection11 (3.6)18.8 (16.8)−47.0 (22.7)16.1 (15.4)Pelvic inflammatory disease8 (2.6)17.4 (23.4)−42.0 (40.6)18.1 (17.9)Pyelonephritis5 (1.6)15.6 (11.3)−50.8 (31.9)16.93 (16.0)Musculoskeletal pain10 (3.3)29.1 (25.0)−43.0 (28.3)15.6 (20.3)Total306 (100)20.4 (24.9)−47.1 (30.9)24.2 (16.1)P=.004.†P=.009.‡P=.022

Table 1, abstract 286 - 60-Minute VAS scores and mean differences in 60-minute and MCSD values in various diagnostic groups in the ED.
Final ED Diagnoses No. (%) Mean VAS at 60 Min, mm (SD) Mean Difference in VAS in 60 Min, mm (SD) MCSD, mm (SD) 
Renal colic 59 (19.3) 15.0 (22.9) −61.3 (28.4) 25.2 (25.8) 
Gastroenteritis 28 (9.2) 14.7 (15.6) −43.7 (28.4) 19.7 (21.7) 
Nonspecific abdominal pain 11 (37.9) 18.6 (26.1) −44.6 (31.1) 18.9 (20.9) 
Acute abdomen 31 (10.1) 38.2 (26.4) −32.0 (35.2) 15.5 (22.4) 
Low back pain 17 (5.6) 28.3 (25.3) −41.3 (28.7) 15.2 (19.6) 
Coronary artery disease 21 (6.9) 19.4 (27.1) −50.2 (28.4) 20.2 (21.5) 
Urinary tract infection 11 (3.6) 18.8 (16.8) −47.0 (22.7) 16.1 (15.4) 
Pelvic inflammatory disease 8 (2.6) 17.4 (23.4) −42.0 (40.6) 18.1 (17.9) 
Pyelonephritis 5 (1.6) 15.6 (11.3) −50.8 (31.9) 16.93 (16.0) 
Musculoskeletal pain 10 (3.3) 29.1 (25.0) −43.0 (28.3) 15.6 (20.3) 
Total 306 (100) 20.4 (24.9) −47.1 (30.9) 24.2 (16.1) 

[]  P=.004.
[†]  P=.009.
[‡]  P=.022


Table 2, abstract 286Studies that focused on the MCSD in acute pain in ED patients.AuthorsYearLocationNo.Eligibility“A Little Less”“A Little More”MCSD, mmEthnicity/LanguageTodd et al1996United States(adult)48T413913White vsblackKelly et al1998Australia(adult)152T and NT58369English-speakingPowell et al2001Australia(children)73T and NT564710English-speakingGallagheret al (9)2001United States(adult)96T and NT934813English versus Spanish-speakingGallagher et al2002United States(adult)101Acute abdomen805116English vs Spanish-speakingDegerliet alTurkey(adult)306TAP3765224,2TurkishT, Trauma; NT, nontrauma; TAP, thoracoabdominal pain.

Table 2, abstract 286 - Studies that focused on the MCSD in acute pain in ED patients.
Authors Year Location No. Eligibility “A Little Less” “A Little More” MCSD, mm Ethnicity/Language 
Todd et al 1996 United States(adult) 48 41 39 13 White vsblack 
Kelly et al 1998 Australia(adult) 152 T and NT 58 36 English-speaking 
Powell et al 2001 Australia(children) 73 T and NT 56 47 10 English-speaking 
Gallagher         
et al (9) 2001 United States(adult) 96 T and NT 93 48 13 English versus Spanish-speaking 
Gallagher et al 2002 United States(adult) 101 Acute abdomen 80 51 16 English vs Spanish-speaking 
Degerli         
et al  Turkey(adult) 306 TAP 376 52 24,2 Turkish 

T, Trauma; NT, nontrauma; TAP, thoracoabdominal pain.

Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.

© 2004  American College of Emergency Physicians. Pubblicato da Elsevier Masson SAS. Tutti i diritti riservati.
Aggiungere alla mia biblioteca Togliere dalla mia biblioteca Stampare
Esportazione

    Citazioni Export

  • File

  • Contenuto

Vol 44 - N° 4S

P. S88 - ottobre 2004 Ritorno al numero
Articolo precedente Articolo precedente
  • Pain management after discharge from the emergency department
  • M.J. Larsen, D.E. Fosnocht, E.R. Swanson
| Articolo seguente Articolo seguente
  • Correlation and consistency of pain severity ratings by teenagers using different pain scales
  • J.M. Takahashi, L.G. Yamamoto

Benvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
L'accesso al testo integrale di questo articolo richiede un abbonamento.

Già abbonato a @@106933@@ rivista ?

@@150455@@ Voir plus

Il mio account


Dichiarazione CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM è registrato presso la CNIL, dichiarazione n. 1286925.

Ai sensi della legge n. 78-17 del 6 gennaio 1978 sull'informatica, sui file e sulle libertà, Lei puo' esercitare i diritti di opposizione (art.26 della legge), di accesso (art.34 a 38 Legge), e di rettifica (art.36 della legge) per i dati che La riguardano. Lei puo' cosi chiedere che siano rettificati, compeltati, chiariti, aggiornati o cancellati i suoi dati personali inesati, incompleti, equivoci, obsoleti o la cui raccolta o di uso o di conservazione sono vietati.
Le informazioni relative ai visitatori del nostro sito, compresa la loro identità, sono confidenziali.
Il responsabile del sito si impegna sull'onore a rispettare le condizioni legali di confidenzialità applicabili in Francia e a non divulgare tali informazioni a terzi.


Tutto il contenuto di questo sito: Copyright © 2026 Elsevier, i suoi licenziatari e contributori. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Inclusi diritti per estrazione di testo e di dati, addestramento dell’intelligenza artificiale, e tecnologie simili. Per tutto il contenuto ‘open access’ sono applicati i termini della licenza Creative Commons.