PurposeMedical professionals’ practices and knowledge regarding cancer pain management have often been cited as inadequate. This study aimed to evaluate knowledge, practices and perceived barriers regarding cancer pain management among physicians and nurses in Korea.MethodsA nationwide questionnaire survey was administered to physicians and nurses involved in the care of cancer patients. Questionnaire items covered pain assessment and documentation practices, knowledge regarding cancer pain management, the perceived barriers to cancer pain control, and processes perceived as the major causes of delay in opioid administration.ResultsA total of 333 questionnaires (149 physicians and 284 nurses) were analyzed. Nurses performed pain assessment and documentation more regularly than physicians did. Although physicians had better knowledge of pain management than did nurses, both groups lacked knowledge regarding the side effects and pharmacology of opioids. Physicians working in the palliative care ward and nurses who had received pain management education obtained higher scores on knowledge. Physicians perceived patients’ reluctance to take opioids as a barrier to pain control, more so than did nurses, while nurses perceived patients’ tendency to under-report of pain as a barrier, more so than did physicians. Physicians and nurses held different perceptions regarding major cause of delay during opioid administration.ConclusionsThere were differences between physicians and nurses in knowledge and practices for cancer pain management. An effective educational strategy for cancer pain management is needed in order to improve medical professionals’ knowledge and clinical practices.
Background/AimsBloating is common bothersome symptoms and most studies conducted in the Western countries found that bloating was frequently associated with lower gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms but many patients complaint bloating as upper GI symptoms in the clinical setting. This study was conducted to assess the prevalence of bloating, and to identify symptom grouping and finally document the impact of bloating in the diagnosis of functional GI disorders. MethodsParticipants in a comprehensive health-screening cohort were enrolled. They were asked about demographic, medical, and social history and upper and lower GI symptoms by using a validated questionnaire. Factor analysis with principal component analysis method with varimax rotation was used. ResultsAmong the total of 1050 subjects (mean age, 44.6 ± 10.2 years; females, 46.4%), significant bloating symptoms were found in 282 (26.9%); the prevalence of functional bloating was 6.9%. Factor analysis revealed a 5-component structure with upper GI symptoms, constipation, diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), constipation-predominant IBS, and fecal incontinence. Abdominal bloating loaded on both the upper GI symptoms (0.51 of loadings) and constipation (0.40). On logistic regression analysis, bloating was more predictable for IBS (OR, 7.5; P < 0.001) than functional dyspepsia (FD; OR, 3.7; P = 0.002). Bloating was more frequently combined with IBS according to their severity, but this association was not detected in patients with FD. ConclusionsAbdominal bloating is common symptom in about a quarter of patients and appears as upper as well as lower GI symptoms. However, abdominal bloating is more predictable for IBS, especially constipation-predominant IBS, than FD. (J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2016;22:509-516)
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.