Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
, 126 (5), e1168-98

A Systematic Review of Faces Scales for the Self-Report of Pain Intensity in Children

Affiliations
Review

A Systematic Review of Faces Scales for the Self-Report of Pain Intensity in Children

Deborah Tomlinson et al. Pediatrics.

Abstract

Context: Numerous faces scales have been developed for the measurement of pain intensity in children. It remains unclear whether any one of the faces scales is better for a particular purpose with regard to validity, reliability, feasibility, and preference.

Objectives: To summarize and systematically review faces pain scales most commonly used to obtain self-report of pain intensity in children for evaluation of reliability and validity and to compare the scales for preference and utility.

Methods: Five major electronic databases were systematically searched for studies that used a faces scale for the self-report measurement of pain intensity in children. Fourteen faces pain scales were identified, of which 4 have undergone extensive psychometric testing: Faces Pain Scale (FPS) (scored 0-6); Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) (0-10); Oucher pain scale (0-10); and Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale (WBFPRS) (0-10). These 4 scales were included in the review. Studies were classified by using psychometric criteria, including construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness, that were established a priori.

Results: From a total of 276 articles retrieved, 182 were screened for psychometric evaluation, and 127 were included. All 4 faces pain scales were found to be adequately supported by psychometric data. When given a choice between faces scales, children preferred the WBFPRS. Confounding of pain intensity with affect caused by use of smiling and crying anchor faces is a disadvantage of the WBFPRS.

Conclusions: For clinical use, we found no grounds to switch from 1 faces scale to another when 1 of the scales is in use. For research use, the FPS-R has been recommended on the basis of utility and psychometric features. Data are sparse for children below the age of 5 years, and future research should focus on simplified measures, instructions, and anchors for these younger children.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 86 PubMed Central articles

See all "Cited by" articles

LinkOut - more resources

Feedback