Why not? Rank 1 pain is just boring. 2 and 3 is where it gets more fun! /hj
Temporary pain can be fun (like leg cramps <3), but if it's uncontrolled and continues for a long time it can be annoying. Definitely agree that the smiley choices on that sign seem a wee bit too masochistic to be making these signs for general use...
What the fuck, man, why is this so accurate? Reading the meme, I thought I'd rate my normal pain as a 4. Then I read the non-chronic pain scale and realized the description matches a 7, which is exactly where this chronic pain scale maps it.
When I was in an ambulance for an injury, the EMT asked me to rate my pain from 1 to 10. I said I didn't know, because I have no frame of reference (because the whole concept of trying to rate pain objectively is stupid, but I didn't say that).
He said just rate it anyway. I said 4. He said, "okay, there's no way it's 4" and dropped it.
Based on these descriptions, it was way higher than 4.
It's not about having an obective answer to your pain levels, that's impossible since everybody experiences pain differently.
I worked in the hospital for some time and it was my task to protocol those pain tables every day.
At least where I worked the point of it was to have visualisation of the patients pain development over time.
For example patients comes in and gives a 8 on the scale.
He gets an operation and gives a 6 afterwards, after a week he gives a 5 but in the next week he gives 7 again - this development could tell us something about the healing process, maybe there's an infection that would've slipped by if we didn't see this unusual rise in pain levels.
Yeah I wasn't answering to your anecdote, just trying to illuminate the purpose of those charts and that their rating is inherently subjective.
Obviously being dismissive about it is not productive.
Although there were times where we asked patients to reassess them, almost always when their answers were in the high end of the scale, a dude sitting totally chill drinking tea answering '10' is not really believable and could cloud what's happening.
I mostly described it as "1 being a mild inconvenience and 10 being the strongest pain you have ever felt in your life"
Because they want to get under those 3 minutes per patient limit.
But for real - if you want to quality things a scale is needed. Otherwise might as well use any description, including showing with your hands "how much".
Thats why I describe the scale to the doctor, eg 'with 10 being fainting from pain, 9 being unable to function or willing to die, etc etc ... my sudden short term pain is at a 6'.
Honestly it would be quite hard for me to distinguish between 4 and 8, depending on how distracted I am. And also it doesn't distinguish between constant pain and pain that flares up.
Anything above 7 is excluded if it's not constant pain. You might have an episode that would register as a 10, but can't be logged as anything larger than 7 because it's not "all the time".
I'd say it's imperfect, because it is too vague and too restrictive at the same time.
Many of those descriptions require you to have had the pain for many days.
How should I know how much the pain would impact my daily life after an accident?
The problem with this scale is that the patient is left reading each number and then deciding based on the description, which may not necessarily reflect the pain they feel.
What WOULD reflect the pain they feel? My own arbitrary scale pegs 10 as the worst pain imaginable, and I can imagine some pretty terrible pain. If I'm not given any frame of reference, the highest I'd rate any pain I've been in, from horrible toothaches to broken bones, no higher than, like, 3. At least this has something tying that number to something else.
I see a number scale like this only really useful for tracking an individual as they progress. In which case, I'd say it'd probably be best to start at 5, "okay sir/madam, right now whatever pain you're feeling, were going to call that a 5. As we progress through your treatment, I want you to remember this pain, as 5, and tell me at given times if it's better, or worse, or the same on a scale of 1-10."
Assessing initial pain is a lot trickier, precisely because you don't have an agreed upon scale. Also, people are WILDLY different with regards to pain. I have a really high pain tolerance, as long as I know why I'm in pain. The thing that bothers me more is not knowing what's causing a pain, Whether it's actively killing me or just trying to make me miserable. Should I include that worry in my pain scale? Or use whatever scale I want to? Or just agree upon a scale and run with it?
This would have helped me recently when I had started using improper heel support insoles for plantar fasciitis. It caused so much pain in my thighs, quads and buttocks due to the weird muscles I was using that every night I would lay in bed on the verge of weeping due to the extreme pain. Felt like every nerve from my feet to my hips were screaming in absolute agony. Somehow I'd wake up each morning with just enough of my body recovered to tackle the next workday before doing it again. Doctor had no explanation or no particular interest in the extreme leg pain I was feeling.
Turns out ditching those weird insoles and wearing my pants/belt a lot higher cured the pain in two days. Now it's just my foot.
I had initially rated my pain a 6.5 or 7, but this chart reveals it was actually a 9 or 10 at certain points in the evening.