Comparison of four @entity158 scales in XXXX with @entity173 or other lower limb @entity130 .

@entity1 @entity2653 @entity173 @entity158 @entity130
BACKGROUND: The applicability of the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) has been questioned in the assessment of @entity158 in the elderly. We compared VAS with three other @entity158 scales, Verbal Rating Scale (VRS), @entity2653 ( @entity2653 ) and @entity2653 ( @entity2653 ), in @entity173 @entity1 . METHODS: VAS, VRS, @entity2653 and @entity2653 were compared in 140 analysable @entity1 undergoing surgery, 70 with @entity173 and 70 with other lower limb @entity130 . @entity158 scores were recorded once a day, repeated after 10 min, for 4 subsequent days starting pre-operatively. The primary endpoint was the rate of @entity158 measurements in @entity173 @entity1 and 90% was chosen as a sufficient level for an applicable @entity158 scale. RESULTS: Age was different between the groups ( @entity173 78    11, other @entity130 49    11 years, P<0.0001). In @entity173 @entity1 , 67-83% of @entity158 measurements were successful with VAS, 82-100% with VRS, 83-96% with @entity2653 and 79-91% with @entity2653 . The success rate with VAS was significantly <90% on 2 days (P<0.0001) and with @entity2653 on 1 day (P=0.04). All the other success rates with the four scales in both groups were above or not different from 90%. CONCLUSION: VRS and @entity2653 were the most applicable scales, unlike VAS, which appeared to be an unreliable @entity158 scale in perioperative @entity173 @entity1 . In @entity1 with other lower limb @entity130 , all four scales provided excellent applicability. Our results are in accordance with the accumulating evidence suggesting that VAS is not an ideal tool for @entity158 measurement in the elderly.
