Högskolan i Skövde

The aims of this study were to investigate what words elderly patients, who had undergone hip surgery, used to describe their experience of pain in spoken language and to compare these words with those used in the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) and Pain-O-Meter (POM). The study was carried out at two orthopaedic and two geriatric clinical departments at a large university hospital in Sweden. Altogether, 60 patients (mean age =77) who had undergone orthopaedic surgery took part in the study. A face-to-face interview was conducted with each patient on the second day after the operation. This was divided into two parts, one tape-recorded and semi-structured in character and one structured interview. The results show that a majority of the elderly patients who participated in this study verbally stated pain and spontaneously used a majority of the words found in the SF-MPQ and in the POM. The patients also used a number of additional words not found in the SF-MPQ or the POM. Among those patients who did not use any of the words in the SF-MPQ and the POM, the use of the three additional words 'stel' (stiff), 'hemsk' (awful) and 'räd(d)(sla)' (afraid/fear) were especially marked. The patients also combined the words with a negation to describe what pain was not. To achieve a more balanced and nuanced description of the patient's pain and to make it easier for the patients to talk about their pain, there is a need for access to a set of predefined words that describe pain from a more multidimensional perspective than just intensity. If the elderly patient is allowed, and finds it necessary, to use his/her own words to describe what pain is but also to describe what pain is not, by combining the words with a negation, then the risk of the patient being forced to choose words that do not fully correspond to their pain can be reduced. If so, pain scales such as the SF-MPQ and the POM can create a communicative bridge between the elderly patient and health care professionals in the pain evaluation process.

This study examined the applicability of three different pain rating scales, the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), the Graphic Rating Scale (GRS) and the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), in geriatric patients. Data collection was performed in a geriatric clinic at a university hospital. A structured interview was conducted with 167 patients (mean age = 80.5 years). Patients rated their current experience of pain twice with a 5-minute pause in-between on the VAS, GRS and NRS, and were then asked if they experienced pain, ache or hurt (PAH) or other symptoms. The correlations were high and significant both between the ratings of the VAS, GRS and NRS (r = 0.78-0.92; p < 0.001) (alternative-forms reliability), and between the test and retesting (r = 0.75-r = 0.83; p < 0.001) (test-retest reliability). A logistic regression analysis showed that the probability to accomplish a rating on the pain scales decreased with advancing age of the patient, and this was especially marked for the VAS. The probability of agreement between the patients' ratings of pain and the verbal report of PAH tended to decrease with advancing age; this was especially so for the VAS. Patients who verbally denied PAH but reported pain on the scales rated it significant lower (p < 0.001) than those who verbally reported PAH and rated the pain as well. Eighteen percent of patients who denied pain but rated a pain experience verbally expressed suffering or distress. The study suggests that pain rating scales such as the VAS, GRS and NRS can be used to evaluate pain experience in geriatric patients. However, agreement between verbally expressed experience of PAH, and the rated experience of pain tended to decrease with advancing age. This indicates that the pain-evaluating process will be substantially improved by an additional penetration supported by a wide variety of expression of hurt, ache, pain, discomfort and distress.

Although pain is a frequent problem among elderly patients, they are often omitted in clinical trials and few studies have focused on assessing pain relief in this population. The aim of this study was to compare geriatric patients' verbally reported effect of analgesics with changes in pain experience rated with four different rating scales: the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), the Graphic Rating Scale (GRS), the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), and the Pain Relief Scale (PRS). Altogether 53 geriatric patients (mean=82 yrs) with non-pathological fractures in 4 geriatric units at a large university hospital were selected. In connection with the administration of analgesics, the patients were asked to "Mark the point that corresponds to your experience of pain just now at rest" on the VAS, GRS and NRS. This was repeated after 1.5-2 hours, and a direct question was asked about whether the analgesic medication given in connection with the initial assessment had had any pain-alleviation effect. Two comparisons were conducted with each patient. The results show that the probability of accomplishing a rating on the VAS, GRS, NRS, and PRS was lower with advancing age in these elderly fracture patients. The correlations between the ratings of the VAS, GRS and NRS were strong and significant (r=0.80-0.95; p<0.001) both at the initial assessments and at the re-assessments. However, the verbally reported effects of the analgesics were often directly opposite to the changes in rated pain. Therefore, application of the VAS, NRS, GRS and PRS for the purpose of assessing pain relief must be combined with supplementary questions that allow the patient to verbally describe possible experience of pain relief.

The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of pain and its characteristics, and to examine the association of pain with cognitive function and depressive symptoms, in a representative sample of 70-year-old men and women. Data were collected within the gerontological and geriatric population studies in Göteborg, Sweden (H-70). A sample of 124 men and 117 women living in the community took part in the study. A questionnaire was applied which included four different aspects of pain experience: prevalence, frequency of episodes of pain, duration and number of locations. In close connection to this, depressive symptoms were assessed using the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale. The prevalence of pain during the last 14 days was higher in women (79%; n = 91) than in men (53%; n = 65) (P<0.001). Women (68%; n = 78) also reported pain that had lasted for >6 months to a greater extent than men (38%; n = 46) (P<0.001). The frequency of episodes of pain was also higher among women, 64% (n = 74) reporting daily pain or pain several days during the last 14 days while 37% of the men (n = 45) did so (P<0.001). Women (33%, n = 38) also reported pain experience from ≥3 locations more often than men (11%; n = 13) (P<0.001). On the other hand, the association between depressive symptoms and pain experience was more evident in men than in women. Women were taking significantly more antidepressants compared to men (P<0.03). The results show that pain is common in 70-year-old people and especially in women. However, associations between depressive symptoms and the four aspects of pain experience were more pronounced among men.