Abstract
Pain is a major cause for visiting a primary care physician. There are, however, few studies on the assessment of pain patients at the primary care level. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to investigate the concordance between general practitioners' (GPs') and patients' assessments of pain intensity and whether this assessment is influenced by the duration or intensity of pain. Seven hundred and thirty-eight patients aged 16 to 75 years, who were visiting a GP because of pain, participated. Both the patients and the GPs rated pain intensity using the horizontal 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Means and correlations were calculated using non-parametric tests. The VAS scales were arbitrarily divided into five grades (one unit = 20 mm) to investigate the concordance between GPs' and patients' assessments of pain intensity. Spearman 's correlation coefficient between GPs' and patients' assessments was 0.31 for non-chronic pain (of duration less than six months) and 0.20 for chronic pain. GPs evaluated graded pain intensity at least one unit lower than patients in 37% of the visits. In one-fifth of the visits (20.5%), the GP's rating was at least two units lower than the patient's rating. The more severe the pain as assessed by patients, the greater the non-concordance between patients' and GPs' assessments. There was considerable non-concordance between GPs' and patients' assessments of pain intensity. GPs tended to estimate their patients' pain intensity as clinically significantly lower than the patients themselves, particularly in chronic and severe pain.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (61.2 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Gureje O., Von Korff M., Simon G. E., Gater R. Persistent pain and well-being: a World Health Organization Study in Primary Care. JAMA. 1998 Jul 8;280(2):147–151. doi: 10.1001/jama.280.2.147. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Larue F., Fontaine A., Colleau S. M. Underestimation and undertreatment of pain in HIV disease: multicentre study. BMJ. 1997 Jan 4;314(7073):23–28. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7073.23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- McCormack H. M., Horne D. J., Sheather S. Clinical applications of visual analogue scales: a critical review. Psychol Med. 1988 Nov;18(4):1007–1019. doi: 10.1017/s0033291700009934. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Miller M. D., Ferris D. G. Measurement of subjective phenomena in primary care research: the Visual Analogue Scale. Fam Pract Res J. 1993 Mar;13(1):15–24. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mäntyselkä P., Kumpusalo E., Ahonen R., Kumpusalo A., Kauhanen J., Viinamäki H., Halonen P., Takala J. Pain as a reason to visit the doctor: a study in Finnish primary health care. Pain. 2001 Jan;89(2-3):175–180. doi: 10.1016/s0304-3959(00)00361-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Nekolaichuk C. L., Bruera E., Spachynski K., MacEachern T., Hanson J., Maguire T. O. A comparison of patient and proxy symptom assessments in advanced cancer patients. Palliat Med. 1999 Jul;13(4):311–323. doi: 10.1191/026921699675854885. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rundshagen I., Schnabel K., Standl T., Schulte am Esch J. Patients' vs nurses' assessments of postoperative pain and anxiety during patient- or nurse-controlled analgesia. Br J Anaesth. 1999 Mar;82(3):374–378. doi: 10.1093/bja/82.3.374. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]