Along with my thought that the pain scale is not reliable, I also believe it to be completely unnecessary. It seems like such a waste of time to try to explain to a patient how to rate the pain that they are feeling when they should be just focusing on how to fix the problem. The real question is if the patient is experiencing pain or not. I understand that this question also poses a problem, because how can we define the concept of pain. The reality is that, most likely, people can distinguish between feeling pain and not feeling pain. I know that when I have been sitting in a doctor's office and I have been asked to rate my pain, I tend to just say that it either hurts or it doesn't hurt at all. The fact of the matter is, the doctor really just needs to know if the patient is feeling any pain, not really to the exact extent to which the pain is being felt. I intend to become a doctor, and to me, it seems like a total waste of time to try and identify the patient's pain on a scale in the process of trying to relieve them of their pain. For the most part, if a person is coming to see a doctor or a specialist, they are experiencing some degree of pain that is forcing them to be seen.
I found Eula Biss' "The Pain Scale" to be very interesting, because it sparked a lot of thoughts in me as I was reading. This type of reading is what makes the wheels of our minds revolve. Many confusing topics and correlations are discussed which force the reader to go to a new realm of thinking, so to speak, in order to understand the point of the reading.
The question of whether the pain scale is "useful" is a good one. I think you are right that they should just focus on "how to fix the problem" rather than a rating of pain.
ReplyDeleteHowever, in the ER for instance, one of their main jobs as they define it is "pain management."