Developing a comparative scale of different nociceptive and neuropathic pain through two psychophysical methods

Authors

  • Priscilla Hortense Universidade de São Paulo; Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto; Centro Colaborador da OMS para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Enfermagem
  • Fátima Aparecida Emm Faleiros Sousa Universidade de São Paulo; Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto; Centro Colaborador da OMS para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Enfermagem

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-11692009000200011

Keywords:

pain measurement, psychophysics

Abstract

The general aim of this study was to create a comparative scale of different types of pain through different psychophysical methods and different samples. The psychophysical methods used were magnitude estimation and category estimation. The participants were 30 patients from different outpatient clinics, 30 physicians and 30 nurses. The results were: 1) cancer pain, myocardial infarction pain, renal colic, burn-injury pain, and labor pain were considered more intense, regardless of the psychophysical method used or sample studied; 2) The ranking of different pain intensities, comparing the different psychophysical methods used, resulted in significant agreement levels with Kendal values close to 1.00; 3) There were divergences in the perception of the intensities of some types of pain. These divergences were especially observed between professionals and patients.

Downloads

Downloads

Published

2009-04-01

Issue

Vol. 17 No. 2 (2009)

Section

Original Articles

License

RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.
Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
 Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.

 

How to Cite

Developing a comparative scale of different nociceptive and neuropathic pain through two psychophysical methods. (2009). Revista Latino-Americana De Enfermagem, 17(2), 207-214. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-11692009000200011