Three new datasets supporting use of the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS-11) for children's self-reports of pain intensity.

Despite wide usage of the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for self-report of pain intensity in clinical practice with children and adolescents, validation data are lacking. We present here three datasets from studies in which the NRS was used together with another self-report scale. Study A compared post-operative pain ratings on the NRS with scores on the Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) in 69 children age 7-17 years who had undergone a variety of surgical procedures. Study B compared post-operative pain ratings on the NRS with scores on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) in 29 children age 9-17 years who had undergone pectus excavatum repair. Study C compared ratings of remembered immunization pain in 236 children who comprised an NRS group and a sex- and age-matched VAS group. Correlations of the NRS with the FPS-R and VAS were r=0.87 and 0.89 in Studies A and B, respectively. In Study C, the distributions of scores on the NRS and VAS were very similar except that scores closest to the no pain anchor were more likely to be selected on the VAS than the NRS. The NRS can be considered functionally equivalent to the VAS and FPS-R except for very mild pain (<1/10). We conclude that use of the NRS is tentatively supported for clinical practice with children of 8years and older, and we recommend further research on the lower age limit and on standardized age-appropriate anchors and instructions for this scale.

Pain, distress, and adult-child interaction during venipuncture in pediatric oncology: an examination of three types of venous access.

This study examined pain and distress from needles in children undergoing blood sampling as a function of adult-child interaction and type of venous access (i.e., central external venous lines, internalized ports, or peripheral access via venipuncture). Participants were 55 pediatric oncology patients, aged 3-18 years, who were undergoing routine blood work. Pain ratings were obtained using the Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) and conversation during the procedure was audio taped for coding using the Child-Adult Medical Procedure Interaction Scale-Revised (CAMPIS-R). Children's ratings of pain using the FPS-R were similar in the port (M=2.57/10, standard deviation [SD]=3.46) and peripheral (M=2.56/10, SD=3.24) groups, despite the fact that most children with internal ports were given a topical anesthetic. Similarly, there were no differences between port and peripheral groups in rates of child coping or distress, or parent and nurse observations of child pain. As would be expected, external line access was not associated with pain or distress, even among very young children, suggesting that they appropriately understood the pain rating scale. Results of the transcribed CAMPIS-R data indicate that the influences in adult-child interaction are bidirectional. Support was found for the well-established positive relationship between child distress and adult reassurance and empathy. Implications for intervention and selection of central venous access devices are discussed.

Systematic review of observational (behavioral) measures of pain for children and adolescents aged 3 to 18 years.

Observational (behavioral) scales of pain for children aged 3 to 18 years were systematically reviewed to identify those recommended as outcome measures in clinical trials. This review was commissioned by the Pediatric Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (www.immpact.org). In an extensive literature search, 20 observational pain scales were identified for review including behavior checklists, behavior rating scales, and global rating scales. These scales varied in their reliance on time sampling and inclusion of physiological items, facial and postural items, as well as their inclusion of multiple dimensions of assessment (e.g., pain and distress). Each measure was evaluated based on its reported psychometric properties and clinical utility. Scales were judged to be indicated for use in specific acute pain contexts rather than for general use. Two scales were recommended for assessing pain intensity associated with medical procedures and other brief painful events. Two scales were recommended for post-operative pain assessment, one for use in hospital and the other at home. Another scale was recommended for use in critical care. Finally, two scales were recommended for assessing pain-related distress or fear. No observational measures were recommended for assessing chronic or recurrent pain because the overt behavioral signs of chronic pain tend to habituate or dissipate as time passes, making them difficult to observe reliably. In conclusion, no single observational measure is broadly recommended for pain assessment across all contexts. Directions for further research and scale development are offered.