ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2021
Quantitative-qualitative analyses of patient-reported pain response after palliative radiation therapy.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The Effectiveness of Hydrodissection with 5% Dextrose for Persistent and Recurrent Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Patient-Reported Outcomes After Chemoradiation in Patients With Anal Cancer: A Qualitative Analysis.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWhile the 0-10 pain scale is often used to assess treatment response, it may not accurately reflect change in pain over time. The purpose of this study is to correlate pain improvement using the 0-10 pain scale to patients' perceived improvement in pain following palliative radiation therapy (RT), and to qualitatively characterize themes of pain assessment.
methodsPatients age ≥ 20 receiving RT for spinal metastases were enrolled. Patients rated their pain (0-10) at the treatment site at RT start, and 1 and 4 weeks post-RT completion. At 1 and 4 weeks post-RT, patients reported their perceived percent improvement in pain (pPIP) (0-100%), which was compared to calculated percent improvement in pain (cPIP) based on the 0-10 pain scores. At 4 weeks post-RT, 20 randomly selected patients participated in a qualitative pain assessment.
resultsSixty-four patients treated at 1-2 sites were analyzed. At 1 week post-RT completion, 53.7% (36/67) reported pPIP within 10 percentage points of cPIP, 32.8% (22/67) reported pPIP > 10 percentage points higher than cPIP, and 13.4% (9/67) reported pPIP > 10 percentage points lower than cPIP. Similar degrees of discordance were seen at 4 weeks post-RT. Qualitative analysis revealed five themes: pain quality (n = 19), activities (n = 9), function (n = 7), medication use (n = 2), and radiation side effects (n = 1).
conclusionsAbout half of patients reported a pPIP substantially disparate from their cPIP, and the change in pain measured by the 0-10 scale tended to underestimate the degree of perceived pain improvement. Multiple themes were identified in qualitative analysis of pain response.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.