La Clinica terapeutica · 2009
[Algometric approach in the diagnostic evaluation of chest pain].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Raso I, Cipriani C, Badiali D, Ranieri P, Camelo G, Cilli M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To contribute to a global clinical evaluation of the patients with chest pain, giving a quantitative analysis of the painful experience in the sensory, emotional, value and mixed component and searching significant differences among the different causes of the symptom.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We have administered the "Questionario Italiano del Dolore" by De Benedictis et al. to 92 patients with chest pain, who were divided into 4 diagnostic groups (acute coronary syndrome, coronary artery disease, oesophagus-gastric disease and other) and compared for the quantitative-qualitative features of the associated pain.
RESULTS: PRIrcE (Global Value Component) resulted higher in the group "other" (A) compared to the patients with acute ischemic heart disease (CIA), with a statistically significant difference (test U-Mann-Whitney; p = 0.04). This group shows statistically significant differences in the emotional component (PRIrcA; p = 0.01) even compared to pain associated with oesophagus-gastric disease (G). In regard to PRIrcA, the difference between G group and the group of patients with chronic ischemic heart disease (CIC), as well as the "double" category, resulted markedly significant (p = 0.03 and p = 0.01 respectively). We extrapolated the "describers" chosen by at least 50% of patients in every category and obtained the semantics configuration of chest pain for every diagnosis.
CONCLUSIONS: PRIrcE resulted lower in CIA group. PRIrcE e PR-IrcA are more represented in CIC group. The same conclusion is valid in the differentiation of pain between CIA and G group and between CIA and A group (the most representative of chronic pain). We found higher values in emotional component compared to pain of new onset as pain becomes chronic.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We have administered the "Questionario Italiano del Dolore" by De Benedictis et al. to 92 patients with chest pain, who were divided into 4 diagnostic groups (acute coronary syndrome, coronary artery disease, oesophagus-gastric disease and other) and compared for the quantitative-qualitative features of the associated pain.
RESULTS: PRIrcE (Global Value Component) resulted higher in the group "other" (A) compared to the patients with acute ischemic heart disease (CIA), with a statistically significant difference (test U-Mann-Whitney; p = 0.04). This group shows statistically significant differences in the emotional component (PRIrcA; p = 0.01) even compared to pain associated with oesophagus-gastric disease (G). In regard to PRIrcA, the difference between G group and the group of patients with chronic ischemic heart disease (CIC), as well as the "double" category, resulted markedly significant (p = 0.03 and p = 0.01 respectively). We extrapolated the "describers" chosen by at least 50% of patients in every category and obtained the semantics configuration of chest pain for every diagnosis.
CONCLUSIONS: PRIrcE resulted lower in CIA group. PRIrcE e PR-IrcA are more represented in CIC group. The same conclusion is valid in the differentiation of pain between CIA and G group and between CIA and A group (the most representative of chronic pain). We found higher values in emotional component compared to pain of new onset as pain becomes chronic.