Comparison of the Effectiveness of Two Different Pain Assessment Methods in Different Orthodontic Procedures

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Van Yuzuncu Yil University, Van, Turkey.

2 Kırıkkale University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics, Kırıkkale, Turkey

Abstract

ABSTRACT
Background: This study compares two pain ratings that patients use to indicate how uncomfortable they are during bonding and the collection of orthodontic registration material.
Methods: Two hundred people, ages eleven to twenty, participated in the study; 125 were female and 75 were male. The participants' discomfort levels were assessed during bonding operations and the initial registration material collection using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Facial discomfort Scale (FPS). During the first registration material collection in oral photography, dental impressions, X-rays, bonding operations, lip retractor insertion, polishing, acid and sealing, and bracket application, pain levels were recorded. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the data between groups, while the Wilcoxon and Friedman tests were used to analyze the data within groups. The gathered data were statistically analyzed with a significance threshold of 5%.
Results: There was a statistically significant positive correlation between the VAS and FPS scales when evaluating pain during intraoral photography, the dental impression procedure, X-rays, lip retractor insertion, polishing, acid and sealing, and bracket bonding (0.537<r<0.734; p=0.001). A statistically significant positive connection was also discovered when the gender difference was included (0.261<r<0.42; p=0.001).
Conclusion: Similar information was obtained during the orthodontic initial registration and bonding procedures using two different pain assessment instruments. It's also believed to make it possible to compare research using different pain scales.

Keywords

Main Subjects


1. Treede RD. The International Association for the Study of Pain
definition of pain: as valid in 2018 as in 1979, but in need of
regularly updated footnotes. Pain Rep. 2018;3(2):e643. doi:
10.1097/pr9.0000000000000643.
2. Haefeli M, Elfering A. Pain assessment. Eur Spine J.
2006;15(Suppl 1):S17-24. doi: 10.1007/s00586-005-1044-x .
3. Le May S, Ballard A, Khadra C, Gouin S, Plint AC, Villeneuve
E, et al. Comparison of the psychometric properties of 3
pain scales used in the pediatric emergency department:
Visual Analogue Scale, Faces Pain Scale-Revised, and Colour
Analogue Scale. Pain. 2018;159(8):1508-17. doi: 10.1097/j.
pain.0000000000001236.
4. Polat O, Karaman AI. Pain control during fixed orthodontic
appliance therapy. Angle Orthod. 2005;75(2):214-9. doi:
10.1043/0003-3219(2005)075<0210:pcdfoa>2.0.co;2.
5. Scheurer PA, Firestone AR, Bürgin WB. Perception of pain as
a result of orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances. Eur J
Orthod. 1996;18(4):349-57. doi: 10.1093/ejo/18.4.349.
6. Ertan Erdinç AM, Dinçer B. Perception of pain during
orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances. Eur J Orthod.
2004;26(1):79-85. doi: 10.1093/ejo/26.1.79.
7. Çağlayan S, Balos Tuncer B. Ortodonti’de ağrının önemi. Eur
Ann Dent Sci. 2011;38(2):95-101.
8. Bergius M, Berggren U, Kiliaridis S. Experience of pain during
an orthodontic procedure. Eur J Oral Sci. 2002;110(2):92-8.
doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0722.2002.11193.x.
9. Gürkan A, Aldemir K, Işik Andsoy I, Asiye GÜ. Ameliyat sonrası
akut ağrı yoğunluğunun değerlendirilmesinde dört farklı ağrı
ölçeğinin karşılaştırılması. Cukurova Med J. 2020;45(4):1562-
71. doi: 10.17826/cumj.741465.
10. Çinarsoy Ciğerim S, Karaman A. Evaluation of pain felt by
patients during orthodontic diagnostic material collection and
direct bonding procedures. Atatürk Univ Diş Hekim Fak Derg.
2022;32(1):58-62. doi: 10.17567/ataunidfd.982035.
11. dos Santos Calderon P, Peixoto RF, Gomes VM, da Mota
Corrêa AS, de Alencar EN, Rossetti LM, et al. Concordance
among different pain scales in patients with dental pain. J
Orofac Pain. 2012;26(2):126-31.
12. Freitas BL, de Souza Pinto M, de Oliveira ES, Douglasde-Oliveira DW,
Galvão EL, Gonçalves PF, et al. Scales
for pain assessment in cervical dentin hypersensitivity: a
comparative study. Cad Saude Colet. 2020;28(2):271-7. doi:
10.1590/1414-462x202000020372.
13. Rosas S, Paço M, Lemos C, Pinho T. Comparison between the
Visual Analog Scale and the Numerical Rating Scale in the
perception of esthetics and pain. Int Orthod. 2017;15(4):543-
60. doi: 10.1016/j.ortho.2017.09.027.
14. Miró J, Huguet A, Nieto R, Paredes S, Baos J. Evaluation of
reliability, validity, and preference for a pain intensity scale
for use with the elderly. J Pain. 2005;6(11):727-35. doi:
10.1016/j.jpain.2005.06.005.
15. Bradley RL, Ellis PE, Thomas P, Bellis H, Ireland AJ, Sandy
JR. A randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy of
ibuprofen and paracetamol in the control of orthodontic pain.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007;132(4):511-7. doi:
10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.12.009.
16. Krishnan V. Orthodontic pain: from causes to management-
-a review. Eur J Orthod. 2007;29(2):170-9. doi: 10.1093/ejo/
cjl081.
17. Alakus Sabuncuoglu F, Ersahan S, Erturk E. A comparison
of two pain scales in the assessment of dental pain during
initial phase of orthodontic treatment. J Int Dent Med Res.
2015;8(2):61-7.
18. Peters ML, Patijn J, Lamé I. Pain assessment in younger
and older pain patients: psychometric properties and
patient preference of five commonly used measures of pain
intensity. Pain Med. 2007;8(7):601-10. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2007.00311.x.
19. Herr K, Spratt KF, Garand L, Li L. Evaluation of the Iowa
pain thermometer and other selected pain intensity scales
in younger and older adult cohorts using controlled clinical
pain: a preliminary study. Pain Med. 2007;8(7):585-600. doi:
10.1111/j.1526-4637.2007.00316.x.
20. Hjermstad MJ, Fayers PM, Haugen DF, Caraceni A, Hanks
GW, Loge JH, et al. Studies comparing Numerical Rating
Scales, Verbal Rating Scales, and Visual Analogue Scales for
assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature
review. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2011;41(6):1073-93. doi:
10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2010.08.016.
21. Bird SB, Dickson EW. Clinically significant changes in
pain along the visual analog scale. Ann Emerg Med.
2001;38(6):639-643. doi:10.1067/mem.2001.118012.
22. Holdgate A, Asha S, Craig J, Thompson J. Comparison of
a verbal numeric rating scale with the visual analogue
scale for the measurement of acute pain. Emerg Med
(Fremantle). 2003;15(5-6):441-6. doi: 10.1046/j.1442-
2026.2003.00499.x.
23. Clark P, Lavielle P, Martínez H. Learning from pain scales:
patient perspective. J Rheumatol. 2003;30(7):1584-8.
24. Williamson A, Hoggart B. Pain: a review of three commonly
used pain rating scales. J Clin Nurs. 2005;14(7):798-804. doi:
10.1111/j.1365-2702.2005.01121.x.
25. Bartley EJ, Fillingim RB. Sex differences in pain: a brief
review of clinical and experimental findings. Br J Anaesth.
2013;111(1):52-8. doi: 10.1093/bja/aet127.
26. Fleming PS, Dibiase AT, Sarri G, Lee RT. Pain experience
during initial alignment with a self-ligating and a conventional
fixed orthodontic appliance system. A randomized controlled
clinical trial. Angle Orthod. 2009;79(1):46-50. doi:
10.2319/121007-579.1.
27. Svensson E. Concordance between ratings using different
scales for the same variable. Stat Med. 2000;19(24):3483-
96. doi: 10.1002/1097-0258(20001230)19:24<3483::aidsim786>3.0.co;2-a.
28. Lund I, Lundeberg T, Sandberg L, Budh CN, Kowalski J,
Svensson E. Lack of interchangeability between visual
analogue and verbal rating pain scales: a cross sectional
description of pain etiology groups. BMC Med Res Methodol.
2005;5:31. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-5-31.