Comparing The Abbey And PAINAD Scales

As both The Abbey and PAINAD scales are subjective tools, where assessment is something that is based on personal opinion or knowledge, the lack of training and guidance provided could cause results to be interpreted differently depending on who was undertaking the assessment (Buffum et al., 2007). It was recognised that results were also dependent on prior knowledge of the individual themselves. A clinical study undertaken by Helfand and Freeman (2009) suggested that nursing staff involved in the study found that both PAINAD and Abbey pain scales required prior knowledge of the individual. When staff undertook the assessments within an acute clinical setting it was difficult to ascertain and interpret whether a patient with dementia had pain, if they were
Both scales positively enhanced nursing care in an acute setting and were both as equally valuable in assessing pain for patients with dementia (Bird, 2005). When evaluating and comparing one against the other, it was felt that both scales enabled pain assessment for dementia/cognitively impaired older people to be more individualised and person centred. However it was found that The Abbey Pain Scale was the preferred choice but it did require the assessor to be trained to use it and was formatted with nurses and doctors when being produced (Abbey, 2004). The PAINAD scale was found to be confusing due to the vocabulary used, but with the needed adjustments of breathing pattern vocabulary, it would be as highly credited as The Abbey Scale (Coker, E. et al, 2008). PAINAD did help educate family and caregivers to understand what were pain associated signals easier enabling recognition of which behaviours to look out for and how to compare what was normal to what was a sign of pain (McClean W,