Self-reported muscle tension assessment: Validation study of the Visual Analog Scale for tension
Tuğçe Erdoğru Demir1
, Ayşe Nilufer Alçalar2, Hanife Özlem Sertel Berk3
1Department of Psychology, Doğuş University, İstanbul, Türkiye
2Department of Basic Medical Sciences, İstanbul University, İstanbul, Türkiye
3Department of Psychology, İstanbul University, İstanbul, Türkiye
Keywords: Algometer, chronic pain, muscle tension, pain intensity, pain management, Visual Analog Scale.
Abstract
Background: This study aims to evaluate the validity of the Visual Analog Scale-Tension (VAS-T).
Patients and Methods: This cross-sectional study included a total of 100 patients with chronic pain and 100 individuals without pain complaints between April 2021 and April 2022. All participants completed a sociodemographic information form, the Visual Analog Scale for Tension (VAS-T), the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS-42), and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). Additionally, patients with chronic pain completed the Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS-P) and algometer assessments. The discriminant, concurrent, and convergent validity of the VAS-T was evaluated.
Results: Concerning discriminant validity, analyses revealed that individuals in the pain group exhibited significantly higher VAS-T scores compared to the control group (p < 0.001). There was a significant correlation between VAS-T scores, muscle tension algometer scores, and anxiety, stress, and alexithymia levels (p < 0.01). Participants reporting low tension on the VAS-T differed significantly from those reporting high tension regarding these variables (p < 0.05).
Conclusion: The self-reported VAS-T is a rapid, practical and valid self-reported tool for assessing muscle tension.
Cite this article as: Erdoğru Demir T, Alçalar AN, Sertel Berk HÖ. Self-reported muscle tension assessment: Validation study of the Visual Analog Scale for tension. Agri 2026;38(2):75-82. doi: 10.5606/agri.2026.78.
T.E.D., A.N.A., H.Ö.S.B.: Concept, design, design, supervision, resources, materials, writing, critical review, analysis and/or interpretation; T.E.D.: Data collection and/or processing; T.E.D., A.N.A.: Literature search.
The authors declared no conflicts of interest with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article.
The authors declare that artificial intelligence (AI) tools were not used, or were used solely for language editing, and had no role in data analysis, interpretation, or the formulation of conclusions. All scientific content, data interpretation, and conclusions are the sole responsibility of the authors. The authors further confirm that AI tools were not used to generate, fabricate, or ‘hallucinate’ references, and that all references have been carefully verified for accuracy.
The authors received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.
Data Sharing Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.