How should clinicians assess acute dental pain?: A review

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Pain is the most common complaint in the dental field and may have a significant impact on the patients’ quality of life. However, objective pain assessment is sometimes difficult, and medical and dental clinicians may encounter cases of pain in the head and neck region, making it difficult to establish differential diagnoses. This study aimed to review acute pain in clinical dentistry at each phase of dental procedures and discuss the current status and issues in the development of acute dental pain assessment methods in the future. Acute pain in clinical dentistry may differ in nature and modifying conditions of pain at each stage: before dental procedures, while visiting dentists, and during and after dental procedures. They are related to actual or potential tissue damage, and may be modified and aided by personal experiences, including psychological and social factors. With respect to the aging and multinational population and pandemic of infectious diseases, significant breakthroughs in the development of new pain scales without verbal descriptions are desirable. Furthermore, it is expected that a new pain scale that can be applied to acute pain in the head and neck regions, including the oral cavity, will be developed.

Related collections

Most cited references 48

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The revised International Association for the Study of Pain definition of pain: concepts, challenges, and compromises

Srinivasa N. Raja, Daniel B. Carr, Milton Cohen … (2020)

The current International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) definition of pain as "An unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage, or described in terms of such damage" was recommended by the Subcommittee on Taxonomy and adopted by the IASP Council in 1979. This definition has become accepted widely by health care professionals and researchers in the pain field and adopted by several professional, governmental, and nongovernmental organizations, including the World Health Organization. In recent years, some in the field have reasoned that advances in our understanding of pain warrant a reevaluation of the definition and have proposed modifications. Therefore, in 2018, the IASP formed a 14-member, multinational Presidential Task Force comprising individuals with broad expertise in clinical and basic science related to pain, to evaluate the current definition and accompanying note and recommend whether they should be retained or changed. This review provides a synopsis of the critical concepts, the analysis of comments from the IASP membership and public, and the committee's final recommendations for revisions to the definition and notes, which were discussed over a 2-year period. The task force ultimately recommended that the definition of pain be revised to "An unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with, or resembling that associated with, actual or potential tissue damage," and that the accompanying notes be updated to a bulleted list that included the etymology. The revised definition and notes were unanimously accepted by the IASP Council early this year.

0 comments Cited 1266 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP).

Gillian A Hawker, Samra Mian, Tetyana Kendzerska … (2011)

0 comments Cited 1013 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

SANRA—a scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles

Christopher Baethge, Sandra Goldbeck-Wood, Stephan Mertens (2019)

Background Narrative reviews are the commonest type of articles in the medical literature. However, unlike systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials (RCT) articles, for which formal instruments exist to evaluate quality, there is currently no instrument available to assess the quality of narrative reviews. In response to this gap, we developed SANRA, the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles. Methods A team of three experienced journal editors modified or deleted items in an earlier SANRA version based on face validity, item-total correlations, and reliability scores from previous tests. We deleted an item which addressed a manuscript’s writing and accessibility due to poor inter-rater reliability. The six items which form the revised scale are rated from 0 (low standard) to 2 (high standard) and cover the following topics: explanation of (1) the importance and (2) the aims of the review, (3) literature search and (4) referencing and presentation of (5) evidence level and (6) relevant endpoint data. For all items, we developed anchor definitions and examples to guide users in filling out the form. The revised scale was tested by the same editors (blinded to each other’s ratings) in a group of 30 consecutive non-systematic review manuscripts submitted to a general medical journal. Results Raters confirmed that completing the scale is feasible in everyday editorial work. The mean sum score across all 30 manuscripts was 6.0 out of 12 possible points (SD 2.6, range 1–12). Corrected item-total correlations ranged from 0.33 (item 3) to 0.58 (item 6), and Cronbach’s alpha was 0.68 (internal consistency). The intra-class correlation coefficient (average measure) was 0.77 [95% CI 0.57, 0.88] (inter-rater reliability). Raters often disagreed on items 1 and 4. Conclusions SANRA’s feasibility, inter-rater reliability, homogeneity of items, and internal consistency are sufficient for a scale of six items. Further field testing, particularly of validity, is desirable. We recommend rater training based on the “explanations and instructions” document provided with SANRA. In editorial decision-making, SANRA may complement journal-specific evaluation of manuscripts—pertaining to, e.g., audience, originality or difficulty—and may contribute to improving the standard of non-systematic reviews.

0 comments Cited 516 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Hayato Itoi

Takashi Ryoke

Hitoshi Yoshimura

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Medicine (Baltimore)

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Medicine (Baltimore)

Journal ID (publisher-id): MD

Title: Medicine

Publisher: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (Hagerstown, MD )

ISSN (Print): 0025-7974

ISSN (Electronic): 1536-5964

Publication date Collection: 11 November 2022

Publication date (Electronic): 11 November 2022

Volume: 101

Issue: 45

Electronic Location Identifier: e31727

Affiliations

[a ] Department of Dentistry and Oral Surgery, Unit of Sensory and Locomotor Medicine, Division of Medicine, Faculty of Medical Sciences University of Fukui Fukui Japan.

Author notes

* Correspondence: Shinpei Matsuda, Department of Dentistry and Oral Surgery, Unit of Sensory and Locomotor Medicine, Division of Medicine, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Fukui, 23-3 Matsuokashimoaizuki, Eiheiji-cho, Yoshida-gun, Fukui 910-1193, Japan (e-mail: shinpeim@ 123456u-fukui.ac.jp ).

Author information

Shinpei Matsuda https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0299-7188

Article

Accession ID: 00057

DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000031727

PMC ID: 10662864

PubMed ID: 36397373

SO-VID: 0670d52a-fd3e-40a1-935b-b8bd3d571604

License:

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

History

Date received : 25 July 2022

Date received : 18 October 2022

Date accepted : 19 October 2022

Custom metadata

OPEN-ACCESS TRUE

Keywords: acute pain,dental,head and neck regions,pain assessment

Data availability:

Keywords: acute pain, dental, head and neck regions, pain assessment

How should clinicians assess acute dental pain?: A review

Read this article at