Comparing Veterinary Diagnosis and a Novel Non-Invasive Device (Paintrace) to Differentiate Location and Quantify Pain in Dogs

Introduction: Currently, pain is principally measured by self-report in humans or validated pain scales in veterinary medicine. A direct, objective biosignal has yet to be elucidated. Here we compare a novel pain monitor directly to veterinary diagnoses to determine correlation of pain quantitation practices.

Materials and Methods: Dogs were followed, in an observational study, evaluating the entire anatomy, from general examination through rehabilitation. Diagnosis was separated into five categories: pain, discomfort, spasms, tightness and triggers. Correlation was determined between veterinary and device diagnoses of pain employing unpaired t-tests.

Results: Based on veterinarian diagnosis, events were categorized into pain and non-pain groups. Using an unpaired t-test, a significant difference between the population means was noted (p < 0.001). Delving deeper into pain versus additional pain-related observations, a Kruskal–Wallis test was used to compare pain, spasm, discomfort, tightness and trigger. Pairwise analysis between these categories revealed significant differences in pain/spasm (p = 0.002), pain/tightness (p = 0.001), pain/trigger (p = 0.006), discomfort/tightness (p = 0.009) and discomfort/trigger (p = 0.018) groupings.

Discussion/Conclusion: Device measurements correlate with veterinary diagnosis with p < 0.001. Significant differentiation was observed between degrees of pain. Further studies are in progress based on positive outcomes in completed IRB approved human studies when compared with self-reported pain; p < 0.001. This study supports the potential to improve translational studies via significant outcome measures.

Acknowledgement: Thank you to Dr. Nigel Gumley, DVM, MSc, Cedarview, Animal Hospital, Ottawa for the canine patients and clinical diagnoses. BioTraceIT provided the devices and assisted in statistical analysis.