RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The statistical analysis typically employed to compare pain both before and after interventions assumes scores are normally distributed. The present study evaluates whether Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), specifically the NRS-11, scores are indeed normally distributed in a clinically-relevant cohort of adults with chronic axial spine pain pre- and post-analgesic intervention. METHODS: Retrospective review from four academic medical centers of prospectively collected data from a uniform pain diary administered to consecutive patients after undergoing medial branch blocks. The pain diary assessed NRS-11 scores immediately pre-injection and at 12 different time points post-injection up to 48 hours. D'Agostino-Pearson tests were used to test normality at all time points. RESULTS: One hundred fifty pain diaries were reviewed and despite normally distributed pre-injection NRS-11 scores (K2 = 0.655, p = 0.72), all post-injection NRS-11 data was not normally distributed (K2 = 9.70- 17.62, p = 0.0001-0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Although the results of parametric analyses of NRS-11 scores are commonly reported in pain research, some properties of NRS-11 do not satisfy the assumptions required for these analyses. The data demonstrate non-normal distributions in post-intervention NRS-11 scores, thereby violating a key requisite for parametric analysis. We urge pain researchers to consider appropriate statistical analysis and reporting for non-normally distributed NRS-11 scores to ensure accurate interpretation and communication of these data. Practicing pain physicians should similarly recognize that parametric post-intervention pain score statistics may not accurately describe the data and should expect manuscripts to utilize measures of normality to justify the selected statistical methods.
