The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 23 , ISSUE 6 ( June, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Evaluation of Effectiveness of Graphics Interchange Format and Wong–Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale as Pain Assessment Tool in Children

Henpu Kamki, Ritesh R Kalaskar, Shruti Balasubramanian

Keywords : Graphic interchange format pain scale, Self-reporting pain scale, Wong–Baker FACES pain rating scale

Citation Information : Kamki H, Kalaskar RR, Balasubramanian S. Evaluation of Effectiveness of Graphics Interchange Format and Wong–Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale as Pain Assessment Tool in Children. J Contemp Dent Pract 2022; 23 (6):634-638.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3365

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 23-09-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Aim: The objective of this preliminary study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of the graphics interchange format (GIF) as a self-reporting pain assessment tool in children. Materials and methods: In this in vivo observational study, pain assessment of 42 children aged 7–13 years with a chief complaint of dental pain reporting the first time to the Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Government Dental College & Hospital, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India, were included. Informed consent was obtained from the parents or guardians. All the responses were obtained by a single practitioner, after showing the respective self-reporting pain scale, that is, Wong–Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale (WBFPRS) and GIF pain scale. A questionnaire study was performed at the end of the study. The data were recorded, and then statistical analyses were performed. Results: Both scales showed significant differences (p = 0.001*) when scales were individually compared to the actual pain intensity experienced by the patient. Both WBFPRS and GIF pain scales have shown non-significant differences (p = 0.155). The GIF pain scale has shown very strong relationship (r = 0.936, p = 0.001*), while WBFPRS showed strong relationship (r = 0.725, p = 0.001*). The GIF pain scale has shown almost perfect agreement (k = 0.911) whereas WBFPRS has shown substantial agreement (k = 0.710) with actual pain intensity. In the questionnaire study, most children strongly agreed that the GIF pain scale is easier to understand than WBFPRS. Conclusion: The GIF pain scale is a very promising self-report pain assessment tool for children. Further research on improving the GIF pain scale is very important. Clinical significance: The newly devised GIF pain scale seems to be a very promising self-report pain scale for effective determination of pain experienced by the patient.

PDF Share
  1. Merskey H. The taxonomy of pain. Med Clin 2007;91(1):13–20. DOI: 10.1016/j.mcna.2006.10.009.
  2. Huguet A, Stinson JN, McGrath PJ. Measurement of self-reported pain intensity in children and adolescents. J Psychosom Res 2010;68(4): 329–336. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2009.06.003.
  3. Khatri A, Kalra N. A comparison of two pain scales in the assessment of dental pain in East Delhi children. ISRN Dent 2012;2012:247351. PMID: 22461986.
  4. O'Rourke D. The measurement of pain in infants, children, and adolescents: From policy to practice. Phys Ther 2004;84(6):560–570. PMID: 15161421.
  5. Howard RF. Current status of pain management in children. JAMA 2003;290(18):2464–2469. DOI: 10.1001/jama.290.18.2464.
  6. Garra G, Singer AJ, Domingo A, et al. The Wong–Baker Pain FACES Scale measures pain, not fear. Pediatr Emerg Care 2013;29(1):17–20. DOI: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e31827b2299.
  7. Szyfelbein SK, Osgood PF, Carr DB. The assessment of pain and plasma beta-endorphin immunoactivity in burned children. Pain 1985;22(2):173–182. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(85)90177-0.
  8. Unruh A, McGrath P, Cunningham JS, et al. Children's drawings of their pain. Pain 1983;17(4):385–392. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(83) 90170-7.
  9. Eland JM. Minimizing pain associated with prekindergarten intramuscular injections. Issues Compr Pediatr Nurs 1981;5(5–6):361–372. DOI: 10.3109/01460868109106351.
  10. Hester NK. The preoperational child's reaction to immunization. Nurs Res 1979;28(4):250–205. PMID: 255924.
  11. Bieri D, Reeve RA, Champion DG, et al. The Faces Pain Scale for the self-assessment of the severity of pain experienced by children: Development, initial validation, and preliminary investigation for ratio scale properties. Pain 1990;41(2):139–150. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(90)90018-9.
  12. Lollar DJ, Smits SJ, Patterson DL. Assessment of pediatric pain: An empirical perspective. J Pediatr Psychol 1982;7(3):267–277. DOI: 10.1093/jpepsy/7.3.267.
  13. McGrath PA. An assessment of children's pain: A review of behavioral, physiological and direct scaling techniques. Pain 1987;31(2):147–1476. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(87)90033-9.
  14. Ross DM, Ross SA. Assessment of pediatric pain: An overview. Issues Compr Pediatr Nurs 1988;11(2–3):73–91. DOI: 10.3109/014608 68809038007.
  15. Magaret ND, Clark TA, Warden CR, et al. Patient satisfaction in the emergency department: A survey of pediatric patients and their parents. Acad Emerg Med 2002;9(12):1379–1388. DOI: 10.1197/aemj.9.12.1379.
  16. Wong–Baker FACES Foundation. Wong–Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale. Available at: Accessed date: 23 April, 2022.
  17. Waddie NA. Language and pain expression. J Adv Nurs 1996;23(5): 868–872. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1996.01072.x.
  18. McCaffery M. Nursing practice theories related to cognition, bodily pain, and man-environment interactions. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Print; 1968.
  19. von Baeyer CL. Children's self-reports of pain intensity: Scale selection, limitations and interpretation. Pain Res Manag 2006;11(3):157–162. DOI: 10.1155/2006/197616.
  20. Chambers CT, Craig KD. An intrusive impact of anchors in children's faces pain scales. Pain 1998;78(1):27–37. DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3959(98) 00112-2.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.