Ovariohysterectomy (OHE) in healthy dogs is an elec- tive surgical procedure which can be reasonably stand- ardized. Cortisol concentrations, subjective scoring such as with the short form of Glasgow composite measure pain scale (CMPS-SF) and visualanalogscale (VAS), and physiological parameters have previously been used in studies of the stress response induced by OHE in dogs [11, 13, 27–30]. The aims of this study were to investigate and compare concentrations of CST, VS, cortisol, body temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, CMPS-SF score, pain behavior VAS and stress behavior VAS scores in healthy dogs before surgery, 3 h after postoperative extu- bation, and at recall 7–15 days after OHE.
diabetes, although convergent validity was demonstrated by correlations between the EQ-VAS and two other mea- sures of overall health. In contrast, both convergent and known-groups validity were observed for the English EQ- VAS. Similar results were also observed for the EQ-VAS in patients with rheumatic diseases , Parkinson’s dis- ease , and breast cancer (Yin-Bun Cheung, personal communication). Therefore, it appears that the Chinese EQ-VAS is not a sensitive measure for self-assessment of overall health in Singaporean patient populations. To the best of our knowledge, no previous studies questioned the sensitivity of the EQ-VAS in specific or the visualanalogscale in general.
Typical symptoms of endometriosis include dysmenor- rhea, dyspareunia, and chronic pelvic pain [12-14]. Pain is commonly considered the most relevant symptom and the primary reason for treatment [14,15]. Different tools for assessing pain in endometriosis, such as the visualanalogscale (VAS) or numerical rating scales, have been used in the past. Recommendations on how to assess endometrio- sis-related symptoms in a way that allows for comparison of results between clinical trials have recently been pub- lished . However, publications on the validity of the
Otherwise healthy individuals, aged 18 to 65 with a pri- mary diagnosis of GAD as determined by a structured clinical interview, and a HAM-A total score ≥ 20 were eli- gible for inclusion. To ensure prominence of anxiety symptoms over depression symptoms, patients were required to have a Covi Anxiety Scale  score ≥ 9 and a Raskin Depression Scale  score ≤ 7. These psychiatric rating scales have long been used in clinical trials and have been shown to be valid tools for differentiating anx- ious and depressed patient subgroups [21,22]. Subjects were excluded from study participation if they had signif- icant suicidal risk, had failed treatment with lorazepam or paroxetine in the past, required daily benzodiazepine use in the three months prior to study participation, or if they had most other concurrent DSM-IV mental disorders, including major depressive disorder, panic disorder with or without agoraphobia, acute stress disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, dissociative disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, social anxiety disorder, anorexia, bulimia, caffeine-induced anxiety disorder, alcohol or substance abuse or dependence, premenstrual dysphoric disorder, or antisocial or borderline personality disorder. Subjects with current or past diagnoses of schizophrenia, psy- chotic disorders, delirium, dementia, amnestic disorders, clinically significant cognitive disorders, bipolar or schizoaffective disorder, benzodiazepine abuse or depen- dence, or factitious disorder were also excluded. Patients were not permitted to use any psychotropic medications and could not have initiated any psychodynamic or behavioral psychotherapy for anxiety within the 3 months prior to the study.
Results: There was no significant difference in terms of hypotension, vomiting, seroma and scrotal edema, recurrence, and wound infection incidence between the groups. However, the operation duration, hospital stay period, headache, urinary retention, postoperative VisualAnalogScale scores, chronic pain, and patient satisfaction showed significant differences between groups.
Periarthritis Shoulder is more common in 35 to 65 years of both male and female. There is a limitation of movements in the shoulder joint. The present study compares the effectiveness of ultrasound and wax therapy in Periarthritis shoulder. Ultrasound was given to 15 patients and wax therapy was given to 15 patients. Pre and Post test were taken by using goniometer and VisualAnalogScale (VAS).This study is to improve the Range of motion and to relieve the pain in shoulder joint. In this study results shows statistical significance of ultrasound and wax therapy within group analysis at the pre and post intervention of both the group shows the improvement in Range Of Motion (ROM) and also decrease in the pain level.
together with sound therapy via instrumentation. The remaining 48 patients were classified as category 0, according to the Jastreboff classi- fication scheme (see below for details) and required only retraining counseling. Scores on the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) improved by 20 or more points for 68% of patients in the TRT group after one year of treatment. However, for the VisualAnalogScale (VAS) of intensity and annoyance of tinnitus, scores improved by two or more points for only 34% of patients in the TRT group. On average, the THI scores for the TRT group decreased from 48% to 32% and the VAS scores decreased from 6.6 to 5.3 after one year. The TRT group improved significantly more than the group on the waiting list and the group that refused sound therapy when recommended. These results suggest that sound therapy may be of some benefit, but they do not indicate whether the counseling aspect of the TRT is important for success.
receiving loop diuretics or nitrates (if systolic blood pressure exceeded 150 mmHg) were included, but were excluded if intravenous vasodilators or inotropic drugs had been administered. Other exclusion criteria included recent acute coronary syndrome, severe pulmonary disease, or stenotic valvular disease. The subjects were randomly assigned to receive placebo (60 subjects), or relaxin at 10, 30, 100, or 250 µ g/kg/day (40, 42, 37 or 49 subjects, respectively), infused intravenously for a 48 hour period. Dyspnea was assessed by patient-reported methods, both visualanalogscale (VAS) and the Likert scale. Other physician-reported parameters monitored included symptoms of worsening heart or renal failure, jugular distension, and edema. Assessments were made during the infusion period, and periodically for 2 weeks. Follow-up contact was made to determine readmission and vital status for up to 180 days.
Purpose: Chronic low back pain is a common clinical problem. As medication, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are generally used; however, they are some- times non-effective. Recently, opioids have been used for the treatment of chronic low back pain, and since 2010, transdermal fentanyl has been used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in Japan. The purpose of the current study was to examine the effi- cacy of transdermal fentanyl in the treatment of chronic low back pain. Materials and Methods: This study included patients (n=62) that suffered from chronic low back pain and were non-responsive to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Their conditions consisted of non-specific low back pain, multiple back operations, and specific low back pain awaiting surgery. Patients were given transdermal fentanyl for chronic low back pain. Scores of the visual analogue scale and the Oswestry Disability Index, as well as adverse events were evaluated before and after therapy. Results: Overall, visual analogue scale scores and Oswestry Disability Index scores improved significantly after treatment. Transdermal fentanyl (12.5 to 50 μg/h) was effective in reducing low back pain in 45 of 62 patients; however, it was not effec- tive in 17 patients. Patients who experienced the most improvement were those with specific low back pain awaiting surgery. Adverse events were seen in 40% of patients (constipation, 29%; nausea, 24%; itching, 24%). Conclusion: Transdermal fentanyl significantly improved visualanalogscale scores and Oswestry Disability Index scores in 73% of patients, especially those with specific low back pain await- ing surgery; however, it did not decrease pain in 27% of patients, including patients with non-specific low back pain or multiple back operations.
Crossley K M, et al. (2004), examined the test-retest reliability, validity, and responsiveness of several outcome measures in the treatment of patellofemoral pain. The data from 71 persons enrolled in an RCT of a conservative intervention for patellofemoral pain were used to evaluate the measures' validity and responsiveness. A subset of this cohort (n=20) was used to assess reliability. Main outcome measures used here were VisualAnalogScale (VAS), the functional index questionnaire (FIQ); the anterior knee pain scale (AKPS) and the global rating of change. They concluded that the AKPS and VAS for usual or worst pain are reliable, valid, and responsive and are therefore recommended for future clinical trials in assessing treatment outcome in persons with patellofemoral pain.
The assessment of self-perceived sensitivity to pain con- sisted of three questions. The first two questions assessed self-perception of pain threshold and pain sensitivity and were phrased as follows: “How would you define your pain threshold in comparison to others using a 0–10 scale, where ‘0’ represents an extremely low pain threshold and ‘10’ stands for an extremely high pain threshold?” and “How would you define your pain sensitivity in comparison to others on a similar scale, where ‘0’ represents complete pain insensitivity and ‘10’ means extreme pain sensitivity?” Prior to responding to these two questions, participants received an explanation regarding the meaning of both pain sensitiv- ity and pain threshold, and the difference between the two: “Pain threshold is the point at which an applied stimulus first becomes painful. The lower the pain threshold, the earlier the stimulus becomes painful. Pain sensitivity on the other hand, represents the extent to which a painful stimulus is perceived as painful by you.” The third question tested self- perceived pain intensity in response to a hypothetical painful event (hypothetical pain intensity [HPI]) and was phrased as follows: “Imagine that while walking fast, you suddenly and forcefully bump a toe into a table’s leg. How would you rank the pain intensity that you would experience at that moment, where ‘0’ means no pain at all and ‘10’ is the most intense pain imaginable?” This hypothetical painful event was chosen because apart from being painful, it is generally perceived as a non-maiming situation, which has been experienced by most people. For all assessments, a 100 mm VisualAnalogScale (VAS) was used.
The Western Ontario McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) is a validated questionnaire used to assess self-reported disability in individuals with knee OA [14,15]. It has been used extensively in clinical trials with individuals with knee OA [16,17]. Although the WOMAC also yields a total score in addition to the subscale scores, subscale scores have been reported in the literature independently of the total score . The WOMAC pain subscale has been consistently used to assess pain, and change in pain—particularly at its chronic stage - in individuals with knee OA . However, self-reported pain may show different results if captured at the moment of its occurrence . Pain intensity can also be assessed using a visualanalogscale (VAS) during a clinical evaluation or right after a functional test that triggers pain [21,22]. The VAS is a validated pain measurement tool that has been used to assess pain levels of individuals with knee OA . Given the use of both of these measures in knee OA  and that they may capture the experience of pain differently [20,23], it may be appropriate to use both generic (VAS) and specific (WOMAC) tools  and observe whether one measure would capture the experience of pain better than the other.
Diagnoses of patients were based on pain on bicipital groove and positive test. The specific test for the diagnosis of biceps tendonitis was Yergason’s test ap- plied for all participants (19). This test is performed by supination of the fo- rearm against resistance at 90˚ elbow flexion. If the patient’s pain increases, the test is rendered as positive . The patients were randomly assigned into two groups: 19 patients in KT group and 19 patients in local injection group. In the first group, KT was used for biceps tendonitis. The Y-form tape was used for the deltoid muscle with slight traction (15% - 25%) applying the “muscle origin and target technique”. The first end of the tape was stuck on the frontal part of the deltoid muscle with the upper arm in the abduct horizontal plane with outward rotation. The other end of the tape was applied to the dorsal part of the deltoid with the upper arm in the adduct horizontal plane with inward rotation. The third part of the tape was stuck on the muscle from the coracoid process to dor- sal deltoid with 50% - 75% traction to correct mechanically the glenohumeral in all patients by Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation specialist . KT was used three times for 24 hours sequentially with four-day intervals; in the second group, one dose of prednisolone plus 1% lidocaine was injected in the bicipital fissure around the long head of the biceps muscle by the same physician. The in- jections and KT therapy were performed by the same physician. The patients were investigated for visualanalogscale (VAS) and range of motion (ROM) in the baseline, second, seventh and twelfth days of intervention. The required sample volume was 18 patients in each group for statistical power of 80% and confidence level of 95%. The gleaned data were analyzed with spss version 16 using Chi-square ( X 2 ) test, ANOVA, repeated measured, and Least Significant
In order to quantitatively measure the degree of pain during mammography, we used a visualanalogscale (VAS) and a device for quantitative analysis of perception and pain and performed regression analysis of the relationship between pain degree and VAS score. Twenty-four subjects underwent a typical mammogram and we found no correlation between pain degree using the de- vice compared with VAS scoring. It is presumed that the system enables quantitative measure- ment and comparison more accurately than subjective markers such as VAS in quantitation of a pain produced in an examination with clearly defined physical size (such as mammography).
Methods: In a cross-sectional study, either EQ-5D version was administered to consecutive outpatients with rheumatic diseases. Measurement equivalence of EQ-5D item responses and utility and visualanalogscale (EQ-VAS) scores between these versions was assessed using multiple regression models (with and without adjusting for potential confounding variables), by comparing the 95% confidence interval (95%CI) of score differences between these versions with pre-defined equivalence margins. An equivalence margin defined a magnitude of score differences (10% and 5% of entire score ranges for item responses and utility/EQ-VAS scores, respectively) which was felt to be clinically unimportant.
Patients and methods: Between December 2013 and November 2015, 47 nucleoplasty procedures on 47 lumbar disks in 31 consecutive patients were performed. The outcome was evaluated using a visualanalogscale (VAS) score. Improvements of ≥50% in VAS scores were considered substantial pain relief. The variables associated with pain relief after nucleoplasty included: 1) age; 2) sex; 3) body mass index; 4) hyperintensity zone at the rear of the disk; 5) hypointensity of the disk; 6) Modic changes of the end plates; 7) spinal instability pain; and 8) discography results.
1 month apart. Subjects returned for a follow-up visit 4 months after the second treatment. The primary endpoint was the degree of overall subject and evaluator (investigators and study nurses) satisfaction assessed using the 5-point Global Satisfaction Scale (ranging from “1” very dissatisfied to “5” very satisfied). Secondary endpoints included assessments of skin quality (flaccidity and volume distribution) using a new VisualAnalogScale for upper arms and overall assessment of treatment using the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale. All (100%) of both subjects and evaluators were “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with treatment. The mean Global Satisfaction Score for investigators and study nurses was 4.60 and for subjects 4.53 (satisfied to very satisfied). Assessments of flaccidity and volume improved significantly compared with baseline at the post-treatment visit and also between visits. Compared with baseline, 77% of subjects were rated as considerably improved (good or great improvement) by the investigator and study nurse; 73% of subjects rated themselves as considerably improved and 43% of these rated a “great improvement.” All stated they would repeat the treatment and recommend it to others. No adverse events were reported. Radiesse ® is an effective minimally invasive treatment
Methods: Data originated from the cross-sectional arm of the Consortium Evaluation of African-Americans with Rheumatoid Arthritis (CLEAR II), which recruited African-Americans with RA from six sites in the Southeastern United States. We used linear regression models to evaluate associations of parental homeownership status and educational level at participant time of birth with participant-reported fatigue (VisualAnalogscale, cm), pain (VisualAnalogscale, cm), disability (Health Assessment Questionnaire) and helplessness (Rheumatology Attitudes Index), independently of participant homeownership status and educational level. Models included random effects to account for intra-site correlations, and were adjusted for variables identified using backward selection, from: age, disease-duration, sex, medication use, body-mass index, smoking history.