Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Feb 17, 2020
Date Accepted: Jul 26, 2020

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Comparison of a Mobile Health Electronic Visual Analog Scale App With a Traditional Paper Visual Analog Scale for Pain Evaluation: Cross-Sectional Observational Study

Turnbull A, Sculley D, Escalona-Marfil C, Riu-Gispert LM, Ruiz-Moreno J, Gironès X, Coda A

Comparison of a Mobile Health Electronic Visual Analog Scale App With a Traditional Paper Visual Analog Scale for Pain Evaluation: Cross-Sectional Observational Study

J Med Internet Res 2020;22(9):e18284

DOI: 10.2196/18284

PMID: 32940621

PMCID: 7530698

Interchangeability of a mHealth electronics Visual Analogue Scale (eVAS) App with a traditional paper Visual Analogue Scale (pVAS) amongst Australian children, adolescents and adults: a cross-sectional observational study

  • Alexandra Turnbull; 
  • Dean Sculley; 
  • Carles Escalona-Marfil; 
  • Lluís Miquel Riu-Gispert; 
  • Jorge Ruiz-Moreno; 
  • Xavier Gironès; 
  • Andrea Coda

ABSTRACT

Background:

The advancement of smart technology in paediatric and adults pain evaluation may offer opportunities to introduce easy-to-use and reliable pain assessment methods within different clinical settings. If promptly introduced within different paediatric and adult pain clinics services, validated and easily accessible mHealth pain App may lead to possible early pain detection, promoting improvement in patient’s quality of life and leading to potentially less time off from school or work.

Objective:

This cross-sectional observational study aims to investigate the interchangeability of an electronic Visual Analogue Scale (eVAS) App with a traditional paper Visual Analogue Scale (pVAS) amongst Australian children, adolescent and adults

Methods:

Healthy participants, age range 10-75 year old, were recruited from a sporting club and a secondary School in Melbourne (Australia). The data collection process involved an application of 8.5 kg/cm2 of pressure from a Wagner Force Dial FDK 20 to the midpoint of the thumb. The pressure was applied twice with a five minutes interval. At each pressure application, participants were asked to randomly records their pain perception using the ‘eVAS’ accessible via InteractiveClinics App’ and the traditional pVAS. Statistical analysis was conducted to determine intra and inter method reliability.

Results:

Overall, 109 healthy participants were recruited. Adults (age: 42.43±14.50 (mean±SD)) had excellent reliability with the ICC as 0.94 (95% CI 0.91, 0.96). Children and Adolescents (age: 13.91±2.89 (mean±SD)) had moderate-good reliability with the ICC calculated as 0.80 (95% CI: 0.70, 0.87) and 0.80 (95% CI: 0.69, 0.87) respectively.

Conclusions:

The eVAS App appear to be interchangeable compared to the traditional pVAS amongst children, adolescents and adults. This pain evaluation method may offer new opportunities to introduce user-friendly and validated pain assessment App for patients, clinicians and allied health professionals Clinical Trial: NA


 Citation

Please cite as:

Turnbull A, Sculley D, Escalona-Marfil C, Riu-Gispert LM, Ruiz-Moreno J, Gironès X, Coda A

Comparison of a Mobile Health Electronic Visual Analog Scale App With a Traditional Paper Visual Analog Scale for Pain Evaluation: Cross-Sectional Observational Study

J Med Internet Res 2020;22(9):e18284

DOI: 10.2196/18284

PMID: 32940621

PMCID: 7530698

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.