Pain Prevalence Study in a Large Canadian Teaching Hospital. Round 2: Lessons Learned?

Sawyer, Jason; Haslam, Lynn; Daines, Pat; Stilos, Kalli

doi:10.1016/j.pmn.2009.01.002

Cited by 46 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although within the values presented by other studies 7,8,[10][11][12][13][14]17 , the fact that 24 hours later there were still 41.1% with pain means that virtually one out of two patients have pain, and that more might be done for their treatment. With regard to severe pain according to the visual analog scale (VAS) at interview time, only two patients have referred it.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

“…The three patients needing more drugs have also waited less than 10 minutes. A study 7 shows that patients had waited 1 to 2 hours for additional analgesia. Surprising is the fact that 47 painful patients at interview time have not asked for more drugs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From these, 35% have referred severe pain 6 . Studies on the prevalence of pain are quality indicators, since they give information both to health professionals and health area managers 7 . So, they are one of the first assistance improvement measures to decrease pain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 1 summarizes some results obtained from different hospitals worldwide to establish an overview. Although much has been done to improve pain management, referred studies point to a prevalence of pain during the interviews of 43 to 84%, and severe pain within 24 hours may reach 42% [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] . True comparisons are difficult due to variations on samples, methods and structure of the studies, but it is possible to make a global analysis and to notice that, no matter how much is published about pain, prevalence is kept high along the years.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some studies have shown pain management improvements as a consequence of world campaigns that organizations such as IASP (International Association for the Study of Pain), WHO (World Health Organization) and JCAHO (Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations) have carried out in favor of pain management and approach 1 . Studies repeating the pain prevalence study of 2008 have obtained worse results in 2010, referring that annual evaluation of prevalence has provided major evidence for the institution and its publication, which is an incentive for other institutions 7,13 . In fact, studies such as the above allow the identification of situations to be improved, leading to the adoption of specific approaches directed to such situations in all evaluated hospitals (Table 1).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Prevalência e características de dor em pacientes internados em hospital português

Silva¹,

Dixe²

2013

Rev. dor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Studies on pain prevalence systematically point to high values. Although not comparable, a global analysis allows inferring that from every two hospitalized patients, one is in pain. This study aimed at determining pain prevalence, its characteristics, analgesic treatment and satisfaction of patients admitted to a hospital in the Center of Portugal with regard to pain evaluation and treatment. METHODS: This is a transversal and observational study with 141 patients admitted for at least 24 hours to surgical and medical units (excluded those unable to communicate), with mean age of 69 years, of both genders, who were interviewed after compliance with respective formal and ethic procedures. RESULTS: Pain prevalence in the 24 hours previous to the study was 52.5% (28.8% severe pain). During interviews, prevalence has decreased to 41.1% (2.7% severe pain). Patients with more severe pain were admitted to surgical services and pain was primarily musculoskeletal. Most patients with pain have waited no more than ten minutes before analgesics were administered. From 57 patients referring pain during data collection, 46 (80.7%) did not require a different drug and 91.3% were happy with their treatment. CONCLUSION: In this institution, there has been pain prevalence and approach similar to the literature, but pain remains undertreated. Such data shall allow the definition and implementation of a more focused and effective pain control program. MÉTODOS:Estudo transversal e observacional realizado com 141 pacientes, internados há pelo menos 24 horas, em unidades cirúrgicas e médicas (excluídos os não comunicantes), com idade média de 69 anos, de ambos os gêneros, a quem foi realizada uma entrevista após o cumprimento dos respetivos procedimentos formais e éticos. RESULTADOS: Obteve-se prevalência de dor nas 24 horas anteriores ao estudo de 52,5% (28,8% dor intensa). Na altura da entrevista, a prevalência diminuiu para 41,1% (2,7% de dor intensa). Os pacientes com mais dor estavam internados nos serviços cirúrgicos e o tipo de dor era sobretudo musculoesquelé-tica. A maioria dos pacientes com dor esperou, no máximo, 10 minutos, para lhe ser administrado um analgésico. Dos 57 que referiram dor no momento da coleta dos dados, 46 (80,7%) não desejaram outro fármaco e 91,3% mostraram-se satisfeitos com o seu tratamento. CONCLUSÃO: Nessa instituição houve prevalência e abordagem da dor semelhantes às da literatura, mas a dor ainda se encontra subtratada. Esses dados permitirão a definição e implementação de um programa de controle de dor mais dirigida e eficaz. Descritores: Dor, Intensidade da dor, Prevalência de dor, Satisfação do paciente, Tratamento da dor. INTRODUCTIONPain is a universal and transversal problem to many diseases. It is subjective, very often difficult to describe, but patients should feel that health professionals are willing to listen to them. If untreated, pain leads to several adverse effects, such as cardiovascular, immunological, thrombotic, psychological, social, sleep...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Prevalência e características de dor em pacientes internados em hospital português

Silva¹,

Dixe²

2013

Rev. dor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A Convenient Synthesis of N‐Aryl Benzamides by Rhodium‐Catalyzed ortho‐Amidation and Decarboxylation of Benzoic Acids

Shi

Liu

Fan

et al. 2014

Chemistry A European J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rhodium-catalyzed amidation of substituted benzoic acids with isocyanates by directed CH functionalization followed by decarboxylation to afford the corresponding N-aryl benzamides is demonstrated, in which the carboxylate serves as a unique, removable directing group. Notably, less common meta-substituted N-aryl benzamides are generated readily from more accessible para- or ortho-substituted groups by employing this strategy.

show abstract

Nominal group technique: A brainstorming tool for identifying areas to improve pain management in hospitalized patients

Peña

Estrada

Soniat

et al. 2011

Journal of Hospital Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND:Pain management in hospitalized patients remains a priority area for improvement; effective strategies for consensus development are needed to prioritize interventions.OBJECTIVE:To identify challenges, barriers, and perspectives of healthcare providers in managing pain among hospitalized patients.DESIGN:Qualitative and quantitative group consensus using a brainstorming technique for quality improvement—the nominal group technique (NGT).SETTING:One medical, 1 medical‐surgical, and 1 surgical hospital unit at a large academic medical center.PARTICIPANTS:Nurses, resident physicians, patient care technicians, and unit clerks.MEASUREMENTS:Responses and ranking to the NGT question: “What causes uncontrolled pain in your unit?”RESULTS:Twenty‐seven health workers generated a total of 94 ideas. The ideas perceived contributing to a suboptimal pain control were grouped as system factors (timeliness, n = 18 ideas; communication, n = 11; pain assessment, n = 8), human factors (knowledge and experience, n = 16; provider bias, n = 8; patient factors, n = 19), and interface of system and human factors (standardization, n = 14). Knowledge, timeliness, provider bias, and patient factors were the top ranked themes.CONCLUSIONS:Knowledge and timeliness are considered main priorities to improve pain control. NGT is an efficient tool for identifying general and context‐specific priority areas for quality improvement; teams of healthcare providers should consider using NGT to address their own challenges and barriers. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2012; © 2011 Society of Hospital Medicine

show abstract

Pain Prevalence Study in a Large Canadian Teaching Hospital. Round 2: Lessons Learned?

Cited by 46 publications

References 10 publications

Prevalência e características de dor em pacientes internados em hospital português

Prevalência e características de dor em pacientes internados em hospital português

A Convenient Synthesis of N‐Aryl Benzamides by Rhodium‐Catalyzed ortho‐Amidation and Decarboxylation of Benzoic Acids

Nominal group technique: A brainstorming tool for identifying areas to improve pain management in hospitalized patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About