Premium
A smartphone version of the Faces Pain Scale‐Revised and the Color Analog Scale for postoperative pain assessment in children
Author(s) -
Sun Terri,
West Nicholas,
Ansermino J. Mark,
Montgomery Carolyne J.,
Myers Dorothy,
Dunsmuir Dustin,
Lauder Gillian R.,
Baeyer Carl L.
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
pediatric anesthesia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.704
H-Index - 82
eISSN - 1460-9592
pISSN - 1155-5645
DOI - 10.1111/pan.12790
Subject(s) - medicine , pain assessment , pain scale , visual analogue scale , physical therapy , clinical significance , clinical trial , scale (ratio) , statistical significance , pain management , cartography , geography
Summary Background Effective pain assessment is essential during postoperative recovery. Extensive validation data are published supporting the F aces P ain S cale‐ R evised ( FPS ‐ R ) and the C olor A nalog S cale ( CAS ) in children. Panda is a smartphone‐based application containing electronic versions of these scales. Objectives To evaluate agreement between P anda and original paper/plastic versions of the FPS ‐ R and CAS and to determine children's preference for either P anda or original versions of these scales. Methods ASA I – III children, 4–18 years, undergoing surgery were assessed using both P anda and original versions of either the FPS ‐ R or CAS . Pain assessments were conducted within 10 min of waking from anesthesia and 30 min later. Results Sixty‐two participants, median (range) age 7.5 (4–12) years, participated in the FPS ‐ R trial; P anda scores correlated strongly with the original scores at both time points ( P earson's r > 0.93) with limits of agreement within clinical significance (80% CI ). Sixty‐six participants, age 13 (5–18) years, participated in the CAS trial. Panda scores correlated strongly with the original scores at both time points ( P earson's r > 0.87); mean pain scores were higher (up to +0.47 out of 10) with P anda than with the original tool, representing a small systematic bias, but limits of agreement were within clinical significance. Most participants who expressed a preference preferred P anda over the original tool (81% of FPS ‐ R , 76% of CAS participants). Conclusion The P anda smartphone application can be used in lieu of the original FPS ‐ R and CAS for assessment of pain in children. Children's preference for P anda may translate to improved cooperation with self‐report of pain.