Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Aug 8;14(16):2310.
doi: 10.3390/ani14162310.

Agreement of Pain Assessment Using the Short Form of the Canine Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale between Veterinary Students, Veterinary Nurses, Veterinary Surgeons, and ECVAA-Diplomates

Mireia Marco-Martorell  1 , Natalie Duffy  2 , Miguel Martinez  3 , Thomas Maddox  1 , Katherine Robson  1
Affiliations

Agreement of Pain Assessment Using the Short Form of the Canine Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale between Veterinary Students, Veterinary Nurses, Veterinary Surgeons, and ECVAA-Diplomates

Mireia Marco-Martorell et al. Animals (Basel). .

Abstract

Several pain scoring systems have been validated to measure pain in dogs. However, pain may not be adequately assessed since these tools are associated with high-level inter-observer variation. The aim of this study is to evaluate the agreement of pain assessment using the CMPS-SF between veterinary students, veterinary nurses, veterinary surgeons, and European College of Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia (ECVAA) diplomates. Forty-five client-owned dogs presented to a teaching hospital were enrolled in this prospective, observational study. All dogs were pain-scored in vivo, while a video of the assessment was recorded and subsequently evaluated by twenty assessors, with five per group. Mean scores between groups were compared, and agreement within groups and agreement of the average scores between groups were assessed by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The intervention point at which dogs were deemed to require additional analgesia was also evaluated. Overall agreement of pain assessment was poor (ICC = 0.494). Nurses had the best inter-observer agreement (ICC = 0.656), followed by ECVAA diplomates (ICC = 0.540), veterinary surgeons (ICC = 0.478), and veterinary students (ICC = 0.432). The best inter-group agreement was between veterinary surgeons and nurses (ICC = 0.951) and between ECVAA diplomates and nurses (ICC = 0.951). Students were more likely to determine that additional analgesia was required compared to other groups. Pain assessment is key for animal welfare, and training in this area should be reinforced to improve consistency.

Keywords: CMPS-SF; agreement; dogs; pain; veterinary students.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Author Natalie Duffy was employed by the company Linnaeus Veterinary Limited. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. Partial results of this study were presented in an oral abstract format at the WCVAA Conference 2023, Sydney, Australia) and the author (M.M.-M.) was the recipient for the WCVAA Higher Degree by Research/Trainee abstract prize (small animal topic) for the abstract titled Inter-individual agreement in canine pain assessment using the Glasgow -SF scale.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Short form (CMPS-SF) of the Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale by [10].
Figure 2
Figure 2
Box and whisker plot summarising all pain scores for each of the groups: ECVAA diplomates (ECVAA Dips), registered veterinary nurses (RVNs), fifth-year veterinary students (VUs), and veterinary surgeons (VSs). Boxes represent the interquartile range from the 25th and 75th percentile. The horizontal bar in each box represents the median value for all scores. The whiskers indicate the range of data values unless outliers are present, in which case the whisker extend to a maximum of 1.5 the interquartile range. Such outlying data points are represented by dots.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Jarrel Pain terms: A list with definitions and notes on usage. Recommended by the IASP Subcommittee on Taxonomy. Pain. 1979;6:249. - PubMed
    1. Raja S.N., Carr D.B., Cohen M., Finnerup N.B., Flor H., Gibson S., Keefe F.J., Mogil J.S., Ringkamp M., Sluka K.A., et al. The revised International Association for the Study of Pain definition of pain: Concepts, challenges, and compromises. Pain. 2020;161:1976–1982. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001939. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rousseau-Blass F., O’Toole E., Marcoux J., Pang D.S.J. Prevalence and management of pain in dogs in the emergency service of a veterinary teaching hospital. Can. Vet. J. 2020;61:294–300. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Holton L.L., Scott E.M., Nolan A.M., Reid J., Welsh E. Relationship between physiological factors and clinical pain in dogs scored using a numerical rating scale. J. Small Anim. Pract. 1998;39:469–474. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-5827.1998.tb03681.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Holton L.L., Scott E.M., Nolan A.M., Reid J., Welsh E., Flaherty D. Comparison of three methods used for assessment of pain in dogs. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 1998;212:61–66. doi: 10.2460/javma.1998.212.01.61. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources