Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38028934›Full record

ArticleArchives of academic emergency medicine2023

Accuracy of Pain Scales in Predicting Critical Diagnoses in Non-Traumatic Abdominal Pain Cases; a Cross-sectional Study.

Supapilai Ueareekul, Chanon Changratanakorn, Parinya Tianwibool, Nattikarn Meelarp, Wachira Wongtanasarasin

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of academic emergency medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. A Look at Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine Journal in 2023.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Supapilai UeareekulDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.
Chanon ChangratanakornDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.
Parinya TianwiboolDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.
Nattikarn MeelarpDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.
Wachira WongtanasarasinDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.
Chiang Mai University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Accurate assessment and management of abdominal pain in the emergency department (ED) is crucial, as it can indicate potentially life-threatening conditions requiring timely treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the ability of pain scales to predict critical diagnoses in patients with non-traumatic abdominal pain. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary university hospital and involved individuals aged 15 years and above who presented to the ED with non-traumatic abdominal pain. Pain severity was evaluated using subjective pain scales, including the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and the Face Pain Scale (FPS), as well as objective pain scales, including the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) and the Non-verbal Pain Score (NVPS). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AuROC) was employed to determine the discriminative ability of each pain scale to predict critical diagnosis. Results: 264 cases with the mean age of 47.2±19.4 years were studied (53.0% male). The most common location of abdominal pain was epigastric pain (43.9%). Most patients presented with dull-aching pain, and those with critical diagnoses had more of this characteristic than those with non-critical diagnoses. (52.5% vs. 28.3%, p = 0.01). The overall median NRS, FPS, CPOT, and NVPS of included participants were 8 (interquartile range (IQR) 7-10), 8 (IQR 6-8), 3 (IQR 1-4), and 3 (IQR 2-4), respectively. Patients with critical diagnoses had a higher NVPS score than patients with non-critical diagnoses (median score of 4 vs. 3, p = 0.02). The AuROC of NRS, FPS, CPOT, and NVPS were 0.53 (95% CI: 0.45-0.62), 0.55 (95% CI: 0.46-0.63), 0.59 (95% CI: 0.50-0.68), and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.53-0.71), respectively. The correlation coefficients among these scales were considered moderately correlated or higher. Conclusion: In evaluating patients with non-traumatic abdominal pain, the NVPS demonstrated the highest accuracy in predicting critical diagnoses. However, all pain scales, whether subjective or objective, exhibited suboptimal performance in predicting critical diagnoses.

Indexed as

Abdominal paincritical care pain observation toolnumerical rating scalepain managementpain scalepain severity

Identifiers

PMID38028934
PMCPMC10646955
OpenAlexW4389179250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.