Running Head: Week 9
Pain Assessment Tool for Postoperative Pain
Pain AssessmentTool for Postoperative Pain
The selected tool should also include an assessment of the subjective perception of their pain, rather than rely on outside observers. In this section, the methodological framework proposed by Fitzpatrick et al. (1998) is used to assess the suitability of instruments for measuring discussed pain associated in daily operations.
For the psychophysical methods used to assess Melzack and Casey's (1968), sensory / discriminative component of pain, the VDS is probably unsuitable in terms of its interpretability. This is due to uncertainties in the verbal descriptions used and the fact that respondents could choose only one word from the set of words that can not adequately reflect their experience of pain. This restriction may also limit the acceptability scale. In the NRS also discrete answers, and the respondent selects a unit, only that its acceptability and accuracy may be questioned.
There is also potential for such a scale to be unreliable, as some respondents may not distinguish between numbers, and this factor may also limit their interpretability.
Two tools that measure the affective component of pain, and Johnson (1972) Two components of scale and Tursky's (1976) PPP, although designed to be able to assess clinical pain and ease of use, may not be suitable as there is no reliability or validity was established.
With regard to the cognitive component, the time scale of pain assessment tool, developed Bilting et al. (1983), may not be suitable for use in daily operations, taking into account that the estimates are based on retrospective records of pain duration. In addition, there is no discussion of its reliability and validity. For the components, relevance, and appropriateness of the PRS is questionable, given that...