Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Research Article

Assessing change in chronic pain severity: the chronic pain grade compared with retrospective perceptions.

Alison M Elliott, Blair H Smith, Philip C Hannaford, W Cairns Smith and W Alastair Chambers
British Journal of General Practice 2002; 52 (477): 269-274.
Alison M Elliott
Department of General Practice & Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill Health Centre. a.m.purves@abdn.ac.uk
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Blair H Smith
Department of General Practice & Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill Health Centre. a.m.purves@abdn.ac.uk
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Philip C Hannaford
Department of General Practice & Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill Health Centre. a.m.purves@abdn.ac.uk
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
W Cairns Smith
Department of General Practice & Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill Health Centre. a.m.purves@abdn.ac.uk
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
W Alastair Chambers
Department of General Practice & Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill Health Centre. a.m.purves@abdn.ac.uk
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is no standard method of measuring change in chronic pain severity. Clinical trials commonly use serial assessment scales, completed at two points in time, to estimate change in pain severity, while clinicians usually ask patients to make a retrospective assessment of change. How the two methods compare is not known. AIM: To assess different methods of measuring change in chronic pain severity, by comparing changes in scores on a serial measure of chronic pain severity using the Chronic Pain Grade (CPG) questionnaire and responders' retrospective perception of change in pain severity. DESIGN OF STUDY: Postal self-completion questionnaires. SETTING: The Grampian region of Scotland. METHOD: Postal questionnaires were sent in March and September 1998 to a random sample of 535 adults with chronic pain, drawn from responders to a postal survey of the region conducted in 1996. RESULTS: Corrected response rates of 87.5% and 90.7% were obtained. Over a six-month period poor levels of agreement were found, with responders' retrospective perceptions mirroring recorded changes in 41.8% of individuals (kappa = 0.081). A low partial correlation coefficient between the two measures (-0.209) was also found. Over a two-year period there were again poor levels of agreement, with responders' retrospective perceptions mirronng recorded changes in 35.2% of individuals (kappa = 0.071). A low partial correlation coefficient (-0.401) was again found. CONCLUSION: There was poor agreement and low correlation between two commonly used methods for assessing change in pain severity over time. This finding has important implications for both service practitioners and researchers.

Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 52 (477)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 52, Issue 477
April 2002
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Assessing change in chronic pain severity: the chronic pain grade compared with retrospective perceptions.
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Assessing change in chronic pain severity: the chronic pain grade compared with retrospective perceptions.
Alison M Elliott, Blair H Smith, Philip C Hannaford, W Cairns Smith, W Alastair Chambers
British Journal of General Practice 2002; 52 (477): 269-274.

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Assessing change in chronic pain severity: the chronic pain grade compared with retrospective perceptions.
Alison M Elliott, Blair H Smith, Philip C Hannaford, W Cairns Smith, W Alastair Chambers
British Journal of General Practice 2002; 52 (477): 269-274.
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Factors influencing help seeking in mentally distressed young adults: a cross-sectional survey.
  • Interprofessional collaboration and interprofessional education.
  • The role of primary care in the prevention of suicide and accidental deaths among young men: an epidemiological study.
Show more Research Article

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2022 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242