Annals of Tropical Medicine and Public Health
Home About us Ahead Of Print Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Editorial Board Login 
Users Online:2017
  Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 847-849

A systematic review of pain assessment method in children

1 Department of Anesthesiology, Clinical Research Development Unit, Yasuj University of Medical Sciences, Yasuj, Iran
2 Master of Critical Care Nursing, Department of Nursing, Islamic Azad University of Yasuj, Yasuj, Iran
3 Department of Pediatric Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
4 Department of Critical Care Nursing, Yasuj University of Medical Sciences, Yasuj, Iran

Correspondence Address:
Hossein Hejr
Department of Anesthesiology, Clinical Research Development Unit, Yasuj University of Medical Sciences, Yasuj
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/ATMPH.ATMPH_155_17

Rights and Permissions

Background and Purpose: There are various methods for assessment of pain in children, but the priority of use of tools in different circumstances is still unknown to many of the researchers. The aim of this study is to review the methods of pain assessment in children. Materials and Methods: All internal studies conducted in Iran in the past 10 years using the keywords such as pain assessment tools to evaluate pain, utilities pain in children, and ways to measure pain in children of databases including Magiran, MEDLIB, SID, Iranmedex, and databases Latin CINHAL, PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar search and data were analyzed using meta-analysis (random effect model). Results: Of the 485 original articles, 33 review articles in the field of pain assessment tools in Iranian children were selected based on inclusion criteria. Various pain assessment tools were used, the most important of which were the most commonly used pain evaluation tools included eight FLACC, CHEOPS, PPPRS, TPPPS, self-report tools including the Wang-Baker FACES and Numerical Rating Scale, physiological criteria, and storytelling, and the report includes Wong-Baker FACES tools and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). Conclusion: The criteria Wong-Baker FACES and NRS were used, although emerging standards such as the FLACC are now widely used in the world.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded18    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal