 |
|
|
 |
PHILIP L. RITTER, VIRGINIA M. GONZÁLEZ, DIANA D. LAURENT, and KATE R. LORIG ABSTRACT. Methods. We developed the VNS, which combines strong visual cues with an 11-point numeric rating scale. The VNS was administered to 2 sets of subjects with arthritis or chronic disease (N = 175, N = 192, respectively) and responses were examined. To compare the VNS to the VAS, we administered both scales to all subjects and used correlations to compare them to each other and to health distress and overall general health scores. A subset of respondents enrolled in an arthritis self-management program were given the VNS 4 months later, and change scores were used to test the sensitivity of the VNS. Results. The VNS had means of 5.4 and 5.6 in the 2 samples, with distributions across the range of possible values. The VNS correlated well with the VAS (r = 0.85) and correlated slightly better than the VAS with the 2 independent health measures. The VNS was more likely to be completed than the VAS and there were fewer coding errors with the VNS. The VNS showed a significant (effect size 0.28) positive change for participants in a self-management course. Conclusion. The VNS appeared to be a valid measure. It was as successful as the VAS in measuring the underlying pain variable. It was easier to administer and code than the VAS, and was sensitive to change in pain. (J Rheumatol 2006;33:574–80)
Key Indexing Terms: PAIN From the Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA. Supported in part by grant No. 1-R01-NR-03146-01 from the National Institute for Nursing Research and by the American College of Rheumatology. P.L. Ritter, PhD; V.M. González, MPH; D.D. Laurent, MPH; K.R. Lorig, DPH. Address reprint requests to P.L. Ritter, Stanford Patient Education Research Center, 1000 Welch Road, Suite 204, Palo Alto, CA 94034. E-mail: philr@stanford.edu Accepted for publication October 28, 2005. All rights reserved. |
