Why the study?
Standard questionnaires cannot capture fluctuating symptoms in chronic pain syndromes, but while the experience sampling method can trace momentary fluctuations, its assessment may impose patient burden.
Is the experience sampling method acceptable, usable, and feasible in patients with chronic secondary pain syndromes?
Is the experience sampling method acceptable, usable, and feasible in patients with chronic secondary pain syndromes?
The experience sampling method appears to be a promising and acceptable measurement tool for tracking symptom fluctuations in patients with secondary chronic pain syndromes, despite a moderate response rate.
ESM shows moderate feasibility without disrupting daily life in chronic pain; leaves open optimization for reliable symptom tracking in research.
Background: In chronic pain syndromes, symptoms can fluctuate and change over time. Standard questionnaires cannot register these fluctuations. Nonetheless, the experience sampling method (ESM) is developed to collect momentary measurements of everyday complaints, tracing fluctuations in symptoms and disabling factors over time. Although valuable information can be collected in this way, assessment may also be a burden. This study aimed to investigate the acceptability, usability, and feasibility of ESM in chronic secondary pain syndromes, in a single-center study in the Netherlands. Methods: A prospective observational study with repeated measurements was conducted in patients with chronic secondary neuropathic and musculoskeletal pain syndromes, including small fiber neuropathy, spinal cord injury, and rheumatoid disorder. Results: Thirty-four participants were included and filled in the ESM, of whom 19 were diagnosed with small fiber neuropathy, 11 with spinal cord injury, and 4 with a rheumatoid disorder. The mean age was 54.7 ± 13.9 years (range: 23-77) of whom 52.9% were female. In total, 19 participants filled in the general and user-friendliness evaluation about the acceptability and usability of the ESM. The general evaluation showed no influence of ESM on participants' social contacts (mean 1.47, SD 1.12), activities (mean 1.74, SD 1.44), and mood (mean 1.89, SD 1.59). The answers options of ESM were a good representation of the experiences of participants (mean 4.58, SD 1.77). Regarding feasibility, the overall response rate for answering the beep signals of ESM was 44.5% in total. The missing rate per person varied from 13% to 97% with a median of 54.1%. Conclusion: The general evaluation and the user-friendliness revealed sufficient outcomes in favor of the ESM application. ESM seems a promising measurement tool to use in secondary chronic pain syndromes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Damci et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: