All 4 faces pain scales were found to be adequately supported by psychometric data .
When given a choice between faces scales , children preferred the WBFPRS .
Confounding of pain intensity with affect caused by use of smiling and crying anchor faces is a disadvantage of the WBFPRS .
: For clinical use , we found no grounds to switch from 1 faces scale to another when 1 of the scales is in use .
CONTEXT : Numerous faces scales have been developed for the measurement of  pain intensity in children .
It remains unclear whether any one of the faces scales is better for a particular purpose with regard to validity , reliability , feasibility , and preference .
OBJECTIVES : To summarize and systematic ally review faces pain scales most commonly used to obtain self-report of pain intensity in children for evaluation of reliability and validity and to compare the scales for preference and utility .
Healthcare professionals' perceptions of pain in infants at risk for neurological impairment
Background To determine whether healthcare professionals perceive the pain of infants differently due to their underst and ing of that infant 's level of risk for neurological impairment . Method Neonatal Intensive Care Units ( NICU 's ) at two tertiary pediatric centers . Ninety-five healthcare professionals who practice in the NICU ( 50 nurses , 19 physicians , 17 respiratory therapists , 9 other ) participated . They rated the pain ( 0–10 scale and 0–6 Faces Pain Scale ) , distress ( 0–10 ) ,  effectiveness of cuddling to relieve pain  ( 0–10 ) and  time to calm without intervention  ( seconds ) for nine video clips of neonates receiving a heel stick . Prior to each rating , they were provided with descriptions that suggested the infant had mild , moderate or severe risk for neurological impairment . Ratings were examined as a function of the level of risk described . Results Professionals ' ratings of pain , distress , and time to calm did not vary significantly with level of risk , but ratings of the effectiveness of cuddling were significantly lower as risk increased [ F ( 2,93 ) = 4.4 , p = .02 ] . No differences in ratings were found due to participants ' age , gender or site of study . Physicians ' ratings were significantly lower than nurses ' across ratings . Conclusion Professionals provided with visual information regarding an infants ' pain during a procedure did not display the belief that infants ' level of risk for neurological impairment affected their pain experience . Professionals ' estimates of the effectiveness of a nonpharmacological intervention did differ due to level of risk
All 4 faces pain scales were found to be adequately supported by psychometric data .
When given a choice between faces scales , children preferred the WBFPRS .
Confounding of pain intensity with affect caused by use of smiling and crying anchor faces is a disadvantage of the WBFPRS .
: For clinical use , we found no grounds to switch from 1 faces scale to another when 1 of the scales is in use .
CONTEXT : Numerous faces scales have been developed for the measurement of  pain intensity in children .
It remains unclear whether any one of the faces scales is better for a particular purpose with regard to validity , reliability , feasibility , and preference .
OBJECTIVES : To summarize and systematic ally review faces pain scales most commonly used to obtain self-report of pain intensity in children for evaluation of reliability and validity and to compare the scales for preference and utility .