Aim: To analyse various pain scales commonly used to determine the effect of different pain control methods during debonding of orthodontic brackets. Study Design. A comparative cross-sectional study performed on a sample of 60 patients (n = 60) including 14 males and 46 females who were ready for debonding and who were divided into three groups, i.e., finger pressure (FP), elastomeric wafer (EW), and stress relief (SR).
Materials and Methods: A 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used to record the pain intensity for each tooth. Another scale known as Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) was used to evaluate the patient's general attitude towards pain perception. The armamentarium and operator were kept same for all the patients. Statistical analysis used was the Kruskal-Wallis test, used for intergroup and intragroup comparison of pain scores.
Results: Lowest total pain score was recorded in the FP group (P=0.043) on intergroup comparison, while on intragroup comparison, higher pain scores were recorded in lower anterior region (P=0.02) in all three groups. There was no significant difference between the pain scores reported by the male and female subjects.
Conclusion: FP is an effective method of pain control. And teeth in the anterior region of lower and upper arches are more sensitive to pain. In terms of cognitive-affective constructs, although the VAS has been widely used in previous studies, the PCS has been detailed to show the most reliable association with physical discomfort and emotional distress.
METHOD: Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptations of assessment measures were implemented. A sample of 303 young military recruits participated in the study. Factor structure, reliability, and validity of scores on the PCS-MY were examined. Convergent validity was investigated with the Positive and Negative Affect Scale, Short-form 12 version 2, and Ryff's Psychological Well-being Scale.
RESULTS: Most participants were men, ranging in age from 19 to 26. The reliability of the PCS-MY scores was adequate (α = 0.90; mean inter-item correlation = 0.43). Confirmatory factor analysis showed that a modified version of the PCS-MY provided best fit estimates to the sample data. The PCS-MY total score was negatively correlated with mental well-being and positively correlated with negative affect (all ps < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The PCS-MY was demonstrated to have adequate reliability and validity estimates in the study sample.
METHODS: A cohort of 611 male Malaysian Army recruits were recruited and followed up at 3 and 6 months. Pain catastrophising, MSD, sociodemographic and work factors were measured using a self-administered questionnaire, and MSI incidence was retrieved from the medical records. Multivariable fixed effects regression was used to model the cumulative incidence of MSD and MSI.
RESULTS: Approximately 12% of the recruits were diagnosed with incident MSI and 80% reported incident MSD. Higher pain catastrophising at baseline was associated with higher 6 month MSD risk (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.6 per 1 SD increase of Pain Catastrophising Scale (PCS) scores; 95% CI 1.2 to 2.0), and longitudinally associated with MSD incidence (aOR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1 to 1.4). Pain catastrophising was not associated with MSI incidence (aOR 1.0, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.3). The association between pain catastrophising and self-reported MSD was stronger among recruits with self-reported past injury (p for interaction <0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Pain catastrophising was able to predict symptomatic MSD, and not physician-diagnosed MSI, and these findings are directly related to individual health beliefs. Pain catastrophising has a greater influence on how military recruits perceived their musculoskeletal conditions during training, and efforts to reduce pain catastrophising may be beneficial.