Imagined Examples of Painful Experiences Provided by Chronic Low Back Pain Patients and Attributed a Pain Numerical Rating Score

Patients' strategies for numeric pain assessment: a qualitative interview study of individuals with hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome

PURPOSE

Chronic pain is a common feature of hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (hEDS), yet how patients assess and communicate their pain remains poorly understood. The objective of the present study was to explore the use of numeric pain assessment in individuals with hEDS, from a patient-centered perspective.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our analysis is based on in-depth qualitative interviews. The interviews were conducted over the phone. Our participants were patients living with hEDS (N = 35). Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed to identify factors related to their use of these pain assessment instruments.

RESULTS

Three primary themes emerged from these data, namely, (1) confusion around the quantification of multidimensional pain, (2) the subjectivity of pain experience, and (3) a strategic use of assessments for practical purposes beyond the accurate representation of pain.

These results demonstrate the need for caution in relying exclusively on numeric pain assessment instruments. We conclude with a brief proposal for a clinical communication strategy that may help to address the limitations of numeric pain assessment that were identified in our interviews.

Initial Content Validation and Roadmap for a New Patient-Reported Outcome Measure of Pain Intensity

Measures of pain intensity (eg, numeric rating scales [NRS]) are widely used in clinical research and practice. While these measures have evidence for validity and reliability, poor standardization of instructions, and response options limits precision of pain assessment, allows for inconsistency in interpretation, and presents a challenge for comparison and aggregation of study results. Despite these pitfalls, the 0 to 10 NRS remains the most commonly used primary outcome measure in clinical trials of pain treatments and is the core measure recommended by regulatory agencies. The purpose of this study was to describe the first phase in the development of a pain intensity measure that is easily interpretable, psychometrically sound, and that adheres to FDA qualification processes. The Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial, Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership conducted concept elicitation interviews (N = 44; 22 with acute pain; 22 with chronic pain) to understand the patient perspective on rating pain intensity and to identify actionable suggestions for improved clarity and meaningfulness of instructions, recall periods, and response options. This article summarizes interview findings, describes how patient input and FDA feedback informed preliminary candidate measures, and provides an overview of the FDA qualification process. PERSPECTIVE: Concept elicitation interviews informed the development of content-valid candidate measures of acute and chronic pain intensity for planned use in clinical trials of pain treatments, and comprise the initial stage in FDA clinical outcome assessment qualification. Measures will subsequently be evaluated through cognitive interviews and a series of psychometric studies.