Study assessed pain assessment reliability in brachycephalic cats, suggesting effective analgesia may reduce pain scores.
Objectives This study investigated inter-rater reliability, agreement and responsiveness of the Feline Grimace Scale (FGS) scores in brachycephalic cats. Methods Twenty-eight brachycephalic cats (6.6 ± 4.4 years; 4.2 ± 1.0 kg) undergoing ocular surgery were included in a prospective, randomized, blinded study. Ninety-five images of these cats were collected from video recordings pre- and postoperatively (before/after analgesia), scored by four raters using the FGS and compared with real-time scores. Limits of agreement (LoA) and bias were evaluated using the Bland-Altman method (good or poor agreement if bias <0.1 or >0.1, respectively). Inter-rater reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC, <0.50 = poor; 0.50–0.75 = moderate; 0.76–0.90 = good; and >0.90 = excellent reliability). Generalized linear mixed models evaluated responsiveness (P <0.05). Results Inter-rater reliability (ICCsingle; 95% confidence intervals) was poor for muzzle tension (0.47; 0.36–0.58) and whiskers change (0.34; 0.22–0.46), good for ear (0.81; 0.74–0.86) and eye position (0.84; 0.79–0.88), moderate for head position (0.71; 0.59–0.79) and excellent for FGS total ratio scores (0.92; 0.89–0.94). LoA ranged from -0.37 to 0.22 with bias of -0.08 suggesting that some cats could have their scores affected in comparison with real-time scores. FGS total scores decreased after analgesia pre- (0.56 ± 0.10 vs 0.38 ± 0.15, P = 0.005) and postoperatively (0.60 ± 0.18 vs 0.36 ± 0.15, P <0.001). Conclusions and relevance The FGS is a responsive pain scoring instrument in brachycephalic cats with ocular pain, with good agreement and excellent inter-rater reliability for total ratio scores. Pain may be overestimated using image assessment in some brachycephalic cats.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marangoni et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: