Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T03:27:40.574Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Good correlation between visual analogue scale and numerical rating scale in the assessment of nasal obstruction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2018

R Haye ,
L K Døsen ,
M Tarangen  and
O Shiryaeva
R Haye*
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Lovisenberg Diakonale Hospital, Oslo, Norway Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Norway
L K Døsen
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Lovisenberg Diakonale Hospital, Oslo, Norway
M Tarangen
Affiliation:
Department of Quality, Lovisenberg Diakonale Hospital, Oslo, Norway
O Shiryaeva
Affiliation:
Department of Quality, Lovisenberg Diakonale Hospital, Oslo, Norway
*
Address for correspondence: Dr Rolf Haye, Department of Otolaryngology, Lovisenberg Diakonale Hospital, Oslo, Norway Fax: +47 2204 1002 E-mail: rolf.haye@medisin.uio.no
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

Results from telephone interviews may be needed to supplement those from mailed questionnaires when response rates are inadequate. This study assessed the correlation between visual analogue scale ratings used in mailed questionnaires and numerical rating scale scores used in telephone interviews.

Methods:

Patients scheduled for nasal septal surgery routinely respond to a visual analogue scale of obstruction during the day and at night. In this study, they were also asked to verbally rate their sense of obstruction using whole numbers.

Results:

There was no significant difference between visual analogue scale and numerical rating scale obstruction scores.

Conclusion:

Ratings of nasal obstruction obtained with a numerical rating scale in telephone interviews are comparable to visual analogue scale scores in mailed questionnaires.

Keywords

Nasal ObstructionOutcome MeasuresVisual Analogue Scale
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 132 , Issue 4 , April 2018 , pp. 327 - 328
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Rhee, JS, Sullivan, CD, Frank, DO, Kimbell, JS, Garcia, GJ. A systematic review of patient-reported nasal obstruction scores defining normative and symptomatic ranges in surgical patients. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2014;16:219–25.Google Scholar
2Haye, R, Amlie, E, Shireyaeva, O, Døsen, LK. Evaluation of a nasal surgical questionnaire designed for monitoring surgical outcomes and comparing different surgical techniques. J Laryngol Otol 2015;129:656–61.Google Scholar
3Hjermstad, MJ, Fayers, PM, Haugen, DF, Caraceni, A, Hanks, GW, Loge, JH et al. Studies comparing numerical rating scales, verbal rating scales and visual analogue scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature review. J Pain Symptom Manage 2011;41:1073–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Haye, R, Tarangen, M, Shiryaeva, O, Døsen, LK. Evaluation of the Nasal Surgical Questionnaire for monitoring results of septoplasty. Int J Otolaryngol 2015;2015:563639.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Bijur, PE, Latimer, CT, Gallagher, EJ. Validation of a verbally administered rating scale of acute pain for use in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med 2003;10:390–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed