Skip to content

Comparison of Different Pain Rating Scales in Patients With Symptomatic Teeth

Comparison of Different Pain Rating Scales in Patients With Symptomatif Teeth

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04231955
Acronym
CoPRS
Enrollment
50
Registered
2020-01-18
Start date
2019-05-01
Completion date
2019-12-09
Last updated
2020-01-22

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Pain, Dental Pain

Keywords

numerical rating scale, visual analogue scale, color analogue scale, faces rating scale, pain intensity

Brief summary

Patients with symptomatic teeth who applied endodontic clinic between April 2019 and December 2019 for root canal treatment were enrolled in this study. All patients were asked to fill four different rating scales: numerical rating scale, visual analogue scale, color analogue scale and faces rating scale for their relevant tooth which is symptomatic and need of root canal treatment. The four scales were then compared statistically.

Detailed description

50 patients who applied endodontic clinic between April 2019 and December 2019 and had symptomatic teeth which were in need of root canal treatment were enrolled for this study. Study detail were explained to all patients and they were then kindly asked to signed a consent form. All patients diagnose, age, gender, tooth number were recorded. Patients were then asked to fill four different pain rating scale in an electronic pain rating scale program. Numerical rating scale (NRS) was a scale between 0 and 10, with 0 indicating no pain while 10 indicating worst pain possible. Visual analogue scale (VAS) was a straight line of 10 cm with one end of the line indicated no pain whilst the other end indicated worst pain possible. Color analogue scale (CAS) was the same length of straight line as in VAS with a color change towards to worst pain possible end. Faces rating scale (FRS) consisted of six different faces indicating the level of pain with the first face indicated no pain while the last face indicated worst pain possible. After the patients marked their pain intensity levels in all four scales the results were statistically analyzed to compared the accuracy of four scales with VAS being the golden standard.

Interventions

DIAGNOSTIC_TESTnumerical rating scale

patients were asked to marked their pain intensity level on numerical rating scale between 0 and 10 and the result was recorded as pain intensity level.

Patients were asked to marked their pain intensity level on visual analogue scale, a straight line with one end indicating no pain and the other end indicating worst pain possible. Then the distance between no pain end and patients' mark was measured and recorded as pain intensity level.

OTHERcolor analogue scale

Patients were asked to marked their pain intensity level on color analogue scale, a straight line with one end indicating no pain and the other end indicating worst pain possibleand color change towards to worst pain possible end. Then the distance between no pain end and patients' mark was measured and recorded as pain intensity level.

OTHERfaces rating scale

Patients were asked marked their pain on a faces rating scale which consisted of six different faces representing different levels of pain intensity with the first face indicating no pain whilst last face indicating worst pain possible. The result was recorded as pain intensity level.

Sponsors

Istanbul Medipol University Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
SCREENING
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

all 50 patients marked their pain intensity levels of their relevant tooth in four different rating scales.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* symptomatic teeth which is in need of root canal treatment

Exclusion criteria

* systemic diseases * age \<18 and \>80 * being able to understand and accept the study protocol with a written consent form.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
comparison of four rating scalesthrough study completion, an average of 1 yearall four pain rating scales (numerical rating scale, visual analogue scale, color analogue scale, faces rating scale) were compared to analyze correlation.
numerical rating scalethrough study completion, an average of 1 yearpain intesity level of patients were recorded on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain posbile)
visual analogue scalethrough study completion, an average of 1 yearPatients were asked to mark their pain intesity level on a 10 cm line with one end indicating no pain and the other end worst pain possible. The distance between no pain and the mark indicates the pain intesity level.
color analogue scalethrough study completion, an average of 1 yearPatients were asked to mark their pain intesity level on a 10 cm color changing line with one end indicating no pain and the other end worst pain possible. The distance between no pain and the mark indicates the pain intesity level.
faces rating scalethrough study completion, an average of 1 yearfaces rating scale consists of 6 faces with the first face indicating no pain and the last face indicating worst pain possbile

Countries

Turkey (Türkiye)

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026