The aims of this study were to: 1) estimate the prevalence of chronic pain (CP) and high impact chronic pain (HICP) in a community sample of children and adolescents; and 2) compare groups (those without CP, those with CP but no HICP, and those with HICP) with respect to demographic variables, pain variables, and physical, psychological, and school-related function. One thousand one hundred and fifteen children and adolescents participated (56% girls; age: ߂ = 11.67; SD = 2.47; range = 8-18 years). The prevalence of CP and HICP was 46% and 5%, respectively, and was higher in girls and increased with age. Participants with HICP reported greater pain intensity and higher pain frequency than those with CP but no HICP. In addition, participants with HICP reported lower mobility, greater fatigue, worst sleep quality, more anxiety and depression symptoms, worst cognitive function, missing more school days, and worse perceived school performance. HICP is a prevalent condition in children and adolescents and is associated with many negative consequences. Stakeholders must be aware of this and ensure that treatment programs are available to reduce the individual and societal impact of HICP in young individuals. PERSPECTIVE: This article provides information on CP and HICP prevalence and impact in children and adolescents. By better understanding the nature and score of these conditions, we will be able to develop more effective early interventions to help this population and thereby reduce their long-term negative impact.

There are many different instruments for assessing pain intensity in children, but the agreement between them is unclear. The aims of this study were to determine the 1-dimensionality of 4 widely used self-report scales for measuring the intensity of pediatric pain, and the agreement between them. A sample of 126 school children between 6 and 8 years of age (mean = 6.87 years; SD = 0.68 year) were interviewed individually and asked to identify the most frequent pain that they had experienced in the 3 months before the interview, and to report their maximum pain intensity using all 4 scales (Visual Analogue Scale, Coloured Analogue Scale, Faces Pain Scale-Revised and Numerical Rating Scale-11). A factor analysis was conducted to determine the 1-dimensionality of these 4 scales. Agreement was calculated with the Bland-Altman method with a maximum limit of agreement set at ± 20 mm. Our data show the 1-dimensionality of the scales. The 95% limits of agreement between each pair of measures were as follows: VAS/CAS (-23.8, 23.4); VAS/NRS-11 (-41, 31.1); VAS/FPS-R (-38.3, 33.6); CAS/NRS-11 (-35.6, 26.2); CAS/FPS-R (-36.4, 32.1), and FPS-R/NRS-11 (-36.3, 31). Our data suggest that these 4 instruments measure 1 common factor but that they are not concordant.