Pain Intensity Assessment Scales for Dermatologic Surgery Patients: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Pain assessment plays an important role in dermatologic surgery. The numeric rating scale (NRS), visual analog scale (VAS), verbal rating scale (VRS), and Faces Pain Scale (FPS) are commonly used scales for pain measurement. Conflicting evidence exists regarding the use of each. Prompt pain recognition and treatment during procedures result in higher patient satisfaction. OBJECTIVE: Determine the most applicable scale for acute pain measurement in dermatologic surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This systematic review was performed in accordance with PRISMA-Supplemental Digital Content 4, http://links.lww.com/DSS/A976 (PROSPERO; CRD42018091058). PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched between April 24, 2018, and May 06, 2018. The search query consisted of pain, pain measurement (NRS, VAS, VRS, and FPS), and assessment/comparison. The inclusion criteria included English language literature with primary/secondary outcome objectives directly comparing ≥2 pain scales in acute pain (age: 13+). Study end points included interscale correlations, patient preferences, provider preferences, study author recommendations, and failure rates. RESULTS: Eight hundred seven studies were retrieved: A total of 42 studies were included. The visual analog scale (n = 42) was most studied, followed by NRS (n = 29), VRS (n = 27), and FPS (n = 11). 93.1% studies showed a high statistical correlation between VAS and NRS. Patients preferred NRS (n = 8/11), followed by FPS (n = 3/11), VRS (n = 2/11), and VAS (n = 1/11). Study authors recommended NRS/VAS (n = 8/19), VRS (n = 6/19), and FPS (n = 1/19). Providers preferred NRS (n = 2/3) and VRS (n = 1/3). The visual analog scale had the highest failure rate (n = 11/12). CONCLUSION: The numeric rating scale is most applicable for dermatologic surgery because of reported patient and provider preferences, lowest failure rates, and most frequent study author recommendations.

Continuing education for systematic reviews: a prospective longitudinal assessment of a workshop for librarians.

OBJECTIVE: This prospective, longitudinal study explored the impact of a continuing education class on librarians' knowledge levels about and professional involvement with systematic reviews. Barriers to systematic review participation and the presence of formal systematic review services in libraries were also measured. METHODS: Participants completed web-based surveys at three points in time: pre-class, post-class, and six-months' follow-up. Descriptive statistics were calculated for demographics and survey questions. Linear mixed effects models assessed knowledge score changes over time. RESULTS: Of 160 class attendees, 140 (88%) completed the pre-class survey. Of those 140, 123 (88%) completed the post-class survey, and 103 (74%) completed the follow-up survey. There was a significant increase (p<0.00001) from pre-class to post-class in knowledge test scores, and this increase was maintained at follow-up. At post-class, 69% or more of participants intended to promote peer review of searches, seek peer review of their searches, search for grey literature, read or follow published guidelines on conduct and documentation of systematic reviews, and ask for authorship on a systematic review. Among librarians who completed a systematic review between post-class and follow-up, 73% consulted published guidelines, 52% searched grey literature, 48% sought peer review, 57% asked for authorship, and 70% received authorship. CONCLUSIONS: Attendance at this continuing education class was associated with positive changes in knowledge about systematic reviews and in librarians' systematic review-related professional practices. This suggests that in-depth professional development classes can help librarians develop skills that are needed to meet library patrons' changing service needs.