IADR Abstract Archives
Statistical Properties of the New Pain Drawing for Orofacial Pain
Objectives: Aim of this study was to investigate the properties of the new pain drawing introduced with the DC/TMD, which includes separate drawings for the mouth and the head additional to the whole body. Focus was set on the reliability of each part and the correlation of the pain drawings with pain chronification.
Methods: A prospectively collected sample of 218 consecutive orofacial pain patients was included. All patients filled out the GCPS v.2 and the new pain drawing. 11 patients filled the pain drawing twice in the same day. The pain drawings were assessed in different ways (e.g. percentage of area covered, number of regions selected) and the results are presented descriptively. The correlation with the GCPS v.2 score was tested with non-parametric tests. The reliability of the pain drawings was assessed with the Pearson correlation coefficient. Level of significance was set at p=0.05.
Results: The proportion of female patients in the final sample was 77.1%. Orofacial pain related disability was found for 97 patients (grades 2b, 3, and 4). The average(SD) percentage covered by the pain drawings was 3.3±6% for the whole body, 4.5±8.5% for the head and 5.9±9.7% for the face. The average(SD) sum of marked regions from all drawings was 10.89±11.26. The reliability of the pain drawing regarding the regions reported in the drawing was significantly good (p=0.002) for the head and the mouth (p<0.001), but not for the whole-body drawing. Only male patients showed a significant correlation between pain drawing and pain-related disability.
Conclusions: The new elements (mouth, head) introduced in the pain drawing are reliable for orofacial pain patients. The pain drawing does not show to correlate to pain chronification in female patients.
Methods: A prospectively collected sample of 218 consecutive orofacial pain patients was included. All patients filled out the GCPS v.2 and the new pain drawing. 11 patients filled the pain drawing twice in the same day. The pain drawings were assessed in different ways (e.g. percentage of area covered, number of regions selected) and the results are presented descriptively. The correlation with the GCPS v.2 score was tested with non-parametric tests. The reliability of the pain drawings was assessed with the Pearson correlation coefficient. Level of significance was set at p=0.05.
Results: The proportion of female patients in the final sample was 77.1%. Orofacial pain related disability was found for 97 patients (grades 2b, 3, and 4). The average(SD) percentage covered by the pain drawings was 3.3±6% for the whole body, 4.5±8.5% for the head and 5.9±9.7% for the face. The average(SD) sum of marked regions from all drawings was 10.89±11.26. The reliability of the pain drawing regarding the regions reported in the drawing was significantly good (p=0.002) for the head and the mouth (p<0.001), but not for the whole-body drawing. Only male patients showed a significant correlation between pain drawing and pain-related disability.
Conclusions: The new elements (mouth, head) introduced in the pain drawing are reliable for orofacial pain patients. The pain drawing does not show to correlate to pain chronification in female patients.