Automated Pain Spots Recognition Algorithm Provided by a Web Service-Based Platform: Instrument Validation Study.

Background: Understanding the causes and mechanisms underlying musculoskeletal pain is crucial for developing effective treatments and improving patient outcomes. Self-report measures, such as the Pain Drawing Scale, involve individuals rating their level of pain on a scale. In this technique, individuals color the area where they experience pain, and the resulting picture is rated based on the depicted pain intensity. Analyzing pain drawings (PDs) typically involves measuring the size of the pain region. There are several studies focusing on assessing the clinical use of PDs, and now, with the introduction of digital PDs, the usability and reliability of these platforms need validation. Comparative studies between traditional and digital PDs have shown good agreement and reliability. The evolution of PD acquisition over the last 2 decades mirrors the commercialization of digital technologies. However, the pen-on-paper approach seems to be more accepted by patients, but there is currently no standardized method for scanning PDs. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of PD analysis performed by a web platform using various digital scanners. The primary goal was to demonstrate that simple and affordable mobile devices can be used to acquire PDs without losing important information. Methods: Two sets of PDs were generated: one with the addition of 216 colored circles and another composed of various red shapes distributed randomly on a frontal view body chart of an adult male. These drawings were then printed in color on A4 sheets, including QR codes at the corners in order to allow automatic alignment, and subsequently scanned using different devices and apps. The scanners used were flatbed scanners of different sizes and prices (professional, portable flatbed, and home printer or scanner), smartphones with varying price ranges, and 6 virtual scanner apps. The acquisitions were made under normal light conditions by the same operator. Results: High-saturation colors, such as red, cyan, magenta, and yellow, were accurately identified by all devices. The percentage error for small, medium, and large pain spots was consistently below 20% for all devices, with smaller values associated with larger areas. In addition, a significant negative correlation was observed between the percentage of error and spot size (R=-0.237; P=.04). The proposed platform proved to be robust and reliable for acquiring paper PDs via a wide range of scanning devices. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that a web platform can accurately analyze PDs acquired through various digital scanners. The findings support the use of simple and cost-effective mobile devices for PD acquisition without compromising the quality of data. Standardizing the scanning process using the proposed platform can contribute to more efficient and consistent PD analysis in clinical and research settings.

Reliability of the Pen-on-Paper Pain Drawing Analysis Using Different Scanning Procedures.

INTRODUCTION: Pen-on-paper pain drawing are an easily administered self-reported measure that enables patients to report the spatial distribution of their pain. The digitalization of pain drawings has facilitated the extraction of quantitative metrics, such as pain extent and location. This study aimed to assess the reliability of pen-on-paper pain drawing analysis conducted by an automated pain-spot recognition algorithm using various scanning procedures. METHODS: One hundred pain drawings, completed by patients experiencing somatic pain, were repeatedly scanned using diverse technologies and devices. Seven datasets were created, enabling reliability assessments including inter-device, inter-scanner, inter-mobile, inter-software, intra- and inter-operator. Subsequently, the automated pain-spot recognition algorithm estimated pain extent and location values for each digitized pain drawing. The relative reliability of pain extent analysis was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient, while absolute reliability was evaluated through the standard error of measurement and minimum detectable change. The reliability of pain location analysis was computed using the Jaccard similarity index. RESULTS: The reliability analysis of pain extent consistently yielded intraclass correlation coefficient values above 0.90 for all scanning procedures, with standard error of measurement ranging from 0.03% to 0.13% and minimum detectable change from 0.08% to 0.38%. The mean Jaccard index scores across all dataset comparisons exceeded 0.90. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis of pen-on-paper pain drawings demonstrated excellent reliability, suggesting that the automated pain-spot recognition algorithm is unaffected by scanning procedures. These findings support the algorithm's applicability in both research and clinical practice.

Pain Extent Is Not Associated with Sensory-Associated Symptoms, Cognitive or Psychological Variables in COVID-19 Survivors Suffering from Post-COVID Pain.

We aimed to investigate the relationship between pain extent, as a sign of sensitization, and sensory-related, cognitive and psychological variables in hospitalized COVID-19 survivors with post-COVID pain. One hundred and forty-six (67 males, 79 females) previously hospitalized COVID-19 survivors with post-COVID pain completed demographic (age, sex, height, weight), sensory-related (Central Sensitization Inventory, Self-Report Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms), cognitive (Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia) and psychological (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index) variables. Pain extent and frequency maps were calculated from pain drawings using customized software. After conducting a correlation analysis to determine the relationships between variables, a stepwise linear regression model was performed to identify pain extent predictors, if available. Pain extent was significantly and weakly associated with pain intensity (r = -0.201, p = 0.014): the larger the pain extent, the lower the pain intensity. No other significant association was observed between pain extent and sensory-related, cognitive, or psychological variables in individuals with post-COVID pain. Females had higher pain intensity, more sensitization-associated symptoms, higher anxiety, lower sleep quality, and higher kinesiophobia levels than males. Sex differences correlation analyses revealed that pain extent was associated with pain intensity in males, but not in females. Pain extent was not associated with any of the measured variables and was also not related to the presence of sensitization-associated symptoms in our sample of COVID-19 survivors with long-term post-COVID pain.

Digital pain extent is associated with pain intensity but not with pain-related cognitions and disability in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate whether digital pain extent is associated with an array of psychological factors such as optimism, pessimism, expectations of recovery, pain acceptance, and pain self-efficacy beliefs as well as to analyse the association between digital pain extent and pain intensity and pain-related disability in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study conducted in a primary health care setting was carried out including 186 individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Patient-reported outcomes were used to assess psychological factors, pain intensity, and pain-related disability. Digital pain extent was obtained from pain drawings shaded using a tablet and analysed using novel customized software. Multiple linear regression models were conducted to evaluate the association between digital pain extent and the aforementioned variables. RESULTS: Digital pain extent was statistically significantly associated with pain intensity. However, digital pain extent was not associated with any psychological measure nor with pain-related disability. DISCUSSION: The results did not support an association between digital pain extent and psychological measures.