Avaliação da dor durante o cateterismo por via transradial utilizando Escala Visual Analógica

Citations of this article
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.


Background Patients undergoing transradial procedures may experience pain associated with radial artery spasm. The pain can be assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), an easy-to-apply, one-dimensional method. This study analyzed the perception of pain using the VAS and correlated it with the perception of spasm by the interventionist. Methods This was an observational, prospective, single-center registry, which included patients undergoing diagnostic or therapeutic transradial procedures. The VAS consists of a 100-mm horizontal line, which has at its extremes the words “no pain” and “unbearable pain”. The patient was instructed to identify the point that represented the perceived pain during the procedure. The interventionist quantified the spasm as zero for no pain, 1 for pain with no resistance to catheter movement, 2 for mild resistance, 3 for moderate resistance, and 4 for intense resistance. Results Pain assessment by patients using the VAS was possible in all patients, and had a mean of 25.5 ± 25.7 mm. For the interventionist, spasm was classified as grade zero in 53 cases (35.8%); grade 1 in 67 (45.3%); grade 2 in 24 (16.2%); grade 3 in 3 (2.0%); and grade 4 in 1 patient (0.7%). Kendall's tau-b and Spearman's (rho) rank correlation coefficients were, respectively, 0.527 and 0.647, showing a moderate positive correlation between the perception of pain by the patient and the perception of spasm by the operator. Conclusions VAS can be used to assess spasm during procedures that use the transradial access, showing a positive correlation with spasm assessment by the interventionist.




Silva, R. L. da, Moreira, D. M., Fattah, T., Conceição, R. S. da, Trombetta, A. P., Panata, L., … Giuliano, L. C. (2015). Avaliação da dor durante o cateterismo por via transradial utilizando Escala Visual Analógica. Revista Brasileira de Cardiologia Invasiva, 23(3), 207–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbciev.2015.08.007

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free