Exploring the use of imagery in burning mouth syndrome patients to help identify impact.

Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is recognized as a neuropathic pain affecting the inside of the mouth, tongue and lips, with no visual signs or biomarkers (Zakrzewska Buchanan 2016).   As communication can be problematic for those living with pain, previous research developed and explored the use of photographic images with patients suffering from chronic pain. The research concluded that the use of such images with other patients would be helpful in pain consultations (PAIN CARDS; Padfield et al 2015). The current study asked, whether these Pain Cards could be helpful with BMS to determine the impact of the condition on Quality of Life (QoL). Adult patients (n=88 women; n=26 men) attending 10 separate ‘BMS information sessions’ were invited to choose at least one Card that represented the characteristics of their condition and at least one which reflected the impact of BMS on their lives. Patients selected more images to reflect the impact of pain (n = 127) rather than images to represent the characteristics/symptoms (n = 73). The most frequently used image of all (n= 13) was used for both characteristics of the pain and its impact. Cards chosen for ‘character’ confirmed the commonly reported physiological sensations of BMS such as the tingling, burning nature of the pain, taste, location and timing. Themes such as difficulties within family relationships, breakdown of relationships, poor communication and lack of understanding were explored through images chosen for impact. The Pain Cards built on current insight into the impact of BMS on QoL. Keywords Photographic images, patients with burning mouth syndrome, quality of life  Selected Bibliography: Zakrzewska J., Buchanan J.A.G. (2016) Burning mouth syndrome. Systematic review 1301. BMJ Clinical Evidence .http://clinicalevidence.bmj.com/x/systematic-review/1301/overview.html. 01:1301 Padfield D., Zakrzewska J.M., Williams A. C. de C. (2015). ‘Do photographic images of pain improve communication in the pain consultation?’ Pain Res Manag 20: 123-128