Interpreting pain as 'catastrophic' makes it worse: the neurological basis

TRANSLATION, CROSS-CULTURAL ADAPTATION AND PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF THE BRAZILIAN VERSIONOF THE PAIN CATASTROPHIZING SCALE-PARENTS

OBJECTIVE

In Brazil, there is no scale to assess parental catastrophizing about their child's pain. This study aimed to translate and cross-culturally adapt the Pain Catastrophizing Scale-Parents to the Brazilian Portuguese language, as well as to preliminarily evaluate its psychometric properties among parents/guardians of children with and without a toothache.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted with 237 parents/other relatives of 237 children. Across-cultural adaptation of the scale into Brazilian Portuguese was carried out according to the universalistic approach. To assess the reliability and validity of the scale, parents/other relatives reported on the child's toothache and filled out the Brazilian versions of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale-Parents and the Dental Discomfort Questionnaire.

RESULTS

There was semantic equivalence with the original version after minor modifications. TheCronbach's alpha for the 13 items of the scale was 0.83, and the respective test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.63 to 0.97. The scores obtained from the Pain Catastrophizing Scale-Parents and the Dental Discomfort Questionnaire had a low correlation (rho=0.25; p<0.001). Thetotal score of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale-Parents differed significantly (p<0.001) in children with a toothache at night (median: 3.0, 25-75 percentile: 25.0-35.5) compared to those who did not have a toothache at night (25.5; 20.0-31.0).

CONCLUSIONS

The Brazilian version of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale-Parents was acceptable in this preliminary evaluation and can be used in Brazilian clinical and research practice.

Effectiveness of gaseous and intravenous inductions on children's anxiety and distress during extraction of teeth under general anesthesia

Context:

Anxiety and distress regarding dental treatment is a major issue for dental patients and can be exaggerated in pediatric dental patients.

Aims:

The aim was to investigate how different methods of induction for general anesthesia affect children's distress for dental procedures such as extraction of teeth.

Subjects and Methods:

This was an observational clinical study conducted at Manchester University Dental Hospital. The induction of anesthesia in children was achieved with either intravenous (I.V.) or a gaseous induction. The Modified Child Smiley Faces Scales were completed for children at various times intervals.

Statistical Analysis Used:

There were statistically significant differences between the mean distress scores for the I.V. and inhalation groups (P values from independent t-test: P < 0.001) was applied.

Results:

In gaseous induction group, the number of children who scored severe and very severe distress was greater than those who were in I.V. group. Gaseous induction was used for 23 children. Preoperatively, 56.5% children were in very severe distress, 17.4% in severe distress, 13% in moderate distress, 8.7% in mild distress and only one (4.3%) showed no distress. For I.V. induction, 11.2% children were in very severe distress, 9% in severe distress, and 9.6% in moderate distress, 24.2% in mild distress and 46.1% showed no distress.

Conclusions:

Gaseous induction anesthesia for extractions of teeth does produce high levels of distress than I.V. induction in children for dental extractions. There was no significant difference between both induction methods in terms of distress levels at the time of recovery and 15 min postoperatively.