ライフサイエンスコーパス: pain scale

1 nts and evaluated pain severity on King's PD pain scale.

2 cMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) pain scale.

3 with the numeric rating scale or behavioral pain scale.

4 t, measured by tender joint count (TJC) or a pain scale.

5 al Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and a pain scale.

6 er Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain scale.

7 ore of > or =30 mm on a 100-mm visual analog pain scale.

8 uration of morning stiffness; and a 10-point pain scale.

9 easured at the same time intervals using two pain scales.

10 rn Ontario and McMaster Universities [WOMAC] pain scale, 0-20: 0, no pain; 20, extreme pain), and car

11 the psychometric properties of 6 behavioral pain scales, 10 sedation/agitation scales, and 5 deliriu

12 to 20 points on a 100-point visual analogue pain scale, 2 to 4 points on the Roland-Morris Disabilit

13 mean improvement in the 100-mm visual analog pain scale, -9.95 [95% CI, -15.6 to -4.3]).

14 he 2 treatments was 13.8 points on the WOMAC pain scale (95% confidence interval -3.9, 31.4 [P=0.13])

15 is Disability Questionnaire [RDQ] and analog pain scales) and subjective (mobility, narcotic use) sco

16 d Oswestry questionnaires, a visual-analogue pain scale, and measurements of range of motion and stra

17 Prospective trials with validated pain scales are needed to examine this further.

18 Pain scale assessment (PS), pain medication consumption

19 stration, safety technologies and the use of pain scales can be successfully integrated into rheumato

20 atio (OR), 1.3 per 10-mm visual analog scale pain scale], chronic constipation (OR, 4.9), prostatism

21 ned intervals and filled out a visual analog pain scale every 2 hours for the first 12 hours after su

22 differences reported on the visual analogue pain scales for the worst pain (mean difference between

23 point numeric rating scale, or other numeric pain scale), function (measured by the 24-point Roland M

24 gh, IIb to IV; low, 0 to IIa) graded chronic pain scale (GCPS) status is predictive of the total cost

25 cteristic Pain Index from the Graded Chronic Pain Scale [GCPS]), 2) jaw function (Jaw Functional Limi

26 The region of sensory loss and visual analog pain scale improved in the treated group (-1.5 vs -0.5;

27 lass correlation coefficient, 0.92; behavior pain scale intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.83; and

28 life, pancreatic insufficiency, alternative pain scales, length of hospital admission, number of int

29 symptoms, examination scores, visual analog pain scale, nerve conduction, and quantitative sensory t

30 s Osteoarthritis Index and the visual analog pain scale of the Multidimensional Health Assessment Que

31 to 20 points on a 100-point visual analogue pain scale, or relative risk of 1.25 to 2.00 for the pro

32 The majority of items in the 2 function and pain scales overlapped and were highly and significantly

33 le, mean (+/-SD) scores on the Knee-Specific Pain Scale (range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicati

34 east once weekly and pain of at least 4 on a pain scale ranging from 0 to 10.

35 mean pain scores at 6 and 14 weeks, using a pain scale ranging from 0.0 (no pain) to 1.75 (extremely

36 The resulting Rheumatoid Arthritis Pain Scale (RAPS) is a quantitative, single-score, self-

37 ion in global distress measured by the Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) at the end of treatment compa

38 domain had fair correlation with Behavioral Pain Scale (rho = 0.24) and was reliable in clinician-cl

39 r synchronization correlated with Behavioral Pain Scale (rho = 0.54), and reliability in clinician-cl

40 , survey criteria for fibromyalgia (Regional Pain Scale score > or =8 and fatigue score > or =6), and

41 siflexion, and 3) body mass index and a knee pain scale to measure obesity and knee pain, respectivel

42 red by the area under the curve (AUC) of the pain scale using data from day 1.

43 Quantitative pain scale values were compared by using Friedman and Tu

44 pain (mean +/- SD scores on a visual analog pain scale [VAPS] 3.12 +/- 2.23 for the RPD and 4.83 +/-

45 e primary outcome, was assessed by the WOMAC pain scale (visual analog scale version).

46 subsequently also to SRP using both a verbal pain scale (VPS) and a visual analog scale (VAS).