Topic
Visual analogue scale
About: Visual analogue scale is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 16194 publications have been published within this topic receiving 460018 citations. The topic is also known as: VAS.
Papers published on a yearly basis
1 / 2
Papers
TL;DR: The SF‐MPQ shows promise as a useful tool in situations in which the standard MPQ takes too long to administer, yet qualitative information is desired and the PPI and VAS are inadequate.
Abstract: A short form of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) has been developed. The main component of the SF-MPQ consists of 15 descriptors (11 sensory; 4 affective) which are rated on an intensity scale as 0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate or 3 = severe. Three pain scores are derived from the sum of the intensity rank values of the words chosen for sensory, affective and total descriptors. The SF-MPQ also includes the Present Pain Intensity (PPI) index of the standard MPQ and a visual analogue scale (VAS). The SF-MPQ scores obtained from patients in post-surgical and obstetrical wards and physiotherapy and dental departments were compared to the scores obtained with the standard MPQ. The correlations were consistently high and significant. The SF-MPQ was also shown to be sufficiently sensitive to demonstrate differences due to treatment at statistical levels comparable to those obtained with the standard form. The SF-MPQ shows promise as a useful tool in situations in which the standard MPQ takes too long to administer, yet qualitative information is desired and the PPI and VAS are inadequate.
4,434 citations
4,011 citations
[...]
TL;DR: For assessing response to treatment, a pain-relief scale has advantages over a pain scale as discussed by the authors, which cannot be said to have been relieved unless pain or pain relief has been directly measured.
4,006 citations
Journal Article•
[...]
TL;DR: Of the various methods for measuring pain the visual analogue scale seems to be the most sensitive, and for assessing response to treatment a pain-relief scale has advantages over a pain scale.
Abstract: Of the various methods for measuring pain the visual analogue scale seems to be the most sensitive. For assessing response to treatment a pain-relief scale has advantages over a pain scale. Pain cannot be said to have been relieved unless pain or pain relief has been directly measured.
3,196 citations
TL;DR: All three pain-rating scales are valid, reliable and appropriate for use in clinical practice, although the Visual Analogue Scale has more practical difficulties than the Verbal Rating Scale or the Numerical Rating Scale.
Abstract: Aims and objectives. This review aims to explore the research available relating to three commonly used pain rating scales, the Visual Analogue Scale, the Verbal Rating Scale and the Numerical Rating Scale. The review provides information needed to understand the main properties of the scales.
Background. Data generated from pain-rating scales can be easily misunderstood. This review can help clinicians to understand the main features of these tools and thus use them effectively.
Method. A MedLine review via PubMed was carried out with no restriction of age of papers retrieved. Papers were examined for methodological soundness before being included. The search terms initially included pain rating scales, pain measurement, Visual Analogue Scale, VAS, Verbal Rating Scale, VRS, Numerical/numeric Rating Scale, NRS. The reference lists of retrieved articles were used to generate more papers and search terms. Only English Language papers were examined.
Conclusions. All three pain-rating scales are valid, reliable and appropriate for use in clinical practice, although the Visual Analogue Scale has more practical difficulties than the Verbal Rating Scale or the Numerical Rating Scale. For general purposes the Numerical Rating Scale has good sensitivity and generates data that can be statistically analysed for audit purposes. Patients who seek a sensitive pain-rating scale would probably choose this one. For simplicity patients prefer the Verbal Rating Scale, but it lacks sensitivity and the data it produces can be misunderstood.
Relevance to clinical practice. In order to use pain-rating scales well clinicians need to appreciate the potential for error within the tools, and the potential they have to provide the required information. Interpretation of the data from a pain-rating scale is not as straightforward as it might first appear.
2,968 citations
Related Topics (5)
Performance Metrics
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2026 | 6 |
| 2025 | 766 |
| 2024 | 1,411 |
| 2023 | 3,309 |
| 2022 | 5,693 |
| 2021 | 1,454 |