Measuring pain as the 5th vital sign does not improve quality of pain management

Diagnosis and treatment of narcotic bowel syndrome

With increased prescription of opioids has come increased recognition of adverse consequences, including narcotic bowel syndrome (NBS). Characterized by incompletely controlled abdominal pain despite continued or increasing doses of opioids, NBS is estimated to occur in 4.2-6.4% of patients chronically taking opioids. Patients with NBS have a high degree of comorbid psychiatric illness, catastrophizing and disability; comorbid substance abuse must also be considered among this population. NBS should be distinguished from opioid-induced bowel disorder, which results from the effects of opioids on gastrointestinal motility and secretion. By contrast, the mechanisms of NBS are probably centrally mediated and include glial cell activation, bimodal opioid modulation in the dorsal horn, descending facilitation of pain and the glutaminergic system. Few treatments have been rigorously studied. A trial of opioid detoxification resulted in complete detoxification for the vast majority of patients with reduction in pain symptoms; however, despite improvement in pain, approximately half of patients returned to opioid use within 3 months. Improved strategies are needed to identify patients who will respond to detoxification and remain off opioids. Comorbid psychiatric and substance abuse disorders are barriers to durable response after detoxification and should be actively sought out and treated accordingly. An effective patient-physician relationship is essential.

The Barriers to High-Quality Inpatient Pain Management: A Qualitative Study

The current literature suggests deficiencies in the quality of acute pain management among general medical inpatients. The aim of this qualitative study is to identify potential barriers to high-quality acute pain management among general medical inpatients at an urban academic medical center during a 2-year period. Data are collected using retrospective chart reviews, survey questionnaires, and semistructured, open-ended interviews of 40 general medical inpatients who have experienced pain during their hospitalization. Our results confirm high prevalence and disabling impacts of pain and significant patient- and provider-related barriers to high-quality acute pain management. We also identify unique system-related barriers such as time delay and pain management culture. Efforts to improve the pain management experience of general medical inpatients will need to address all these barriers.

[Pain scale: implementation for patients in the immediate postoperative period of cardiac surgery]

A clinical intervention study was developed in a hospital specialized in cardiology in Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil, with the objective of evaluating the implementation of the pain scale in post-operative cardiac surgery patients. It was developed in four steps: pre-test on pain, training lecture for nursing staff, and, reapplication of the pre-test at 30 and 60 days. The test consisted of ten questions weighing one point each. Scores > or =7 were determined to represent satisfactory knowledge in using the pain scale. The sample consisted of 57 nursing professionals. The scores ranged from 6.12 +/- 1.65 in the pre-test to 7.73 +/- 1.05 and 8.18 +/- 0.99 after 30 and 60 days, respectively (p<0.005). Pain intensity was correlated to medication standardized by protocol. The training improved the knowledge of the team and the type of analgesia administered in relation to pain intensity.

[Organization of pediatric pain management: Austrian interdisciplinary recommendations for pediatric perioperative pain management]

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain management is still in need of vast improvement, especially for children. The aim of this article is to demonstrate which structures and processes must be optimized to ultimately improve patient satisfaction and safety.

RESPONSIBILITIES

Basic prerequisites are among others personnel continuity and good cooperation in a multiprofessional team. A clear assignment of responsibilities is also of essential importance.

PATIENT HISTORY AND INFORMED CONSENT

On admission every patient should be questioned on the currently existing pain. Patients or the parents must be informed about the pain therapy in a comprehensible manner. Possible complications, chances of success, advantages and disadvantages of the planned procedure and alternative forms of treatment must be discussed.

IMPLEMENTATION

The implementation needs a great deal of consideration. The introduction of clearly defined pathways and thorough schooling contribute more to successful pain management than the establishment of pain measurement or the use of special techniques alone.

EVALUATION AND DOCUMENTATION

Because pain intensity can only be described indirectly it is difficult to assess in children. Assessment is made by another person until children are 5 years old. The gold standard in pain measurement is, however, self-estimation using appropriate scales which is possible for older children. The routinely carried out representation of pain values and prompt documentation of all pain therapeutic measures are indispensible for the control and optimization of pain therapy.

QUALITY OF RESULTS

Whether improvements in acute pediatric pain therapy will actually be achieved can only be realized by standardized compilation and analysis of the quality of therapy. For this purpose QUIPSInfant was developed.

Understanding the rural-urban differences in nonmedical prescription opioid use and abuse in the United States

Nonmedical prescription opioid misuse remains a growing public problem in need of action and is concentrated in areas of US states with large rural populations such as Kentucky, West Virginia, Alaska, and Oklahoma. We developed hypotheses regarding the influence of 4 factors: (1) greater opioid prescription in rural areas, creating availability from which illegal markets can arise; (2) an out-migration of young adults; (3) greater rural social and kinship network connections, which may facilitate drug diversion and distribution; and (4) economic stressors that may create vulnerability to drug use more generally. A systematic consideration of the contexts that create differences in availability, access, and preferences is critical to understanding how drug use context varies across geography.

Care management practices for chronic pain in veterans prescribed high doses of opioid medications

BACKGROUND

There is growing interest in the primary care management of patients with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) who are prescribed long-term opioid therapy.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine the care management practices and medical utilization of patients prescribed high doses of opioids relative to patients prescribed traditional doses of opioids.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of veterans who had CNCP in 2008 and reviewed medical care for the prior 2 years. Patients with CNCP who were prescribed high-dose opioid therapy (≥180mg morphine equivalent per day for 90+ consecutive days; n = 60) were compared with patients prescribed traditional dose opioid therapy (5-179mg morphine equivalent per day for 90+ consecutive days; n = 60).

RESULTS

Patients in the high-dose group had several aspects of documented care that differed from patients in the traditional dose group, including more medical visits, attempting an opioid taper, receiving a urine drug screen and developing a pain goal. The majority of variables that were assessed did not differ between groups, including documented assessments of functional status or co-morbid psychopathology, opioid rotation, discussion of treatment side effects, non-pharmacological treatments or collaboration with mental health or pain specialists.

CONCLUSIONS

Further work is needed to identify mechanisms for optimizing care management for patients with CNCP who are prescribed high doses of opioid medications.

Pain: a quality of care issue during patients' admission to hospital

AIM

To determine the extent of clinically significant pain suffered by hospitalized patients during their stay and at discharge.

BACKGROUND

The management of pain in hospitals continues to be problematic, despite long-standing awareness of the problem and improvements, e.g. acute pain teams and patient-controlled analgesia, epidural analgesia. Poorly managed pain, especially acute pain, often leads to adverse physical and psychological outcomes including persistent pain and disability. A systems approach may improve the management of pain in hospitals.

DESIGN

A descriptive cross-sectional exploratory design.

METHOD

A large electronic pain score database of vital signs and pain scores was interrogated between 1st January 2010 and 31st December 2010 to establish the proportion of hospital inpatient stays with clinically significant pain during the hospital stay and at discharge.

FINDINGS

A total of 810,774 pain scores were analysed, representing 38,451 patient stays. Clinically significant pain was present in 38·4% of patient stays. Across surgical categories, 54·0% of emergency admissions experienced clinically significant pain, compared with 48·0% of elective admissions. Medical areas had a summary figure of 26·5%. For 30% patients, clinically significant pain was followed by a consecutive clinically significant pain score. Only 0·2% of pain assessments were made independently of vital signs.

CONCLUSION

Reducing the risk of long-term persistent pain should be seen as integral to improving patient safety and can be achieved by harnessing organizational pain management processes with quality improvement initiatives. The assessment of pain alongside vital signs should be reviewed. Setting quality targets for pain are essential for improving the patient's experience.

Development and evaluation of the feasibility and effects on staff, patients, and families of a new tool, the Psychosocial Assessment and Communication Evaluation (PACE), to improve communication and palliative care in intensive care and during clinical uncertainty

BACKGROUND

There are widespread concerns about communication and support for patients and families, especially when they face clinical uncertainty, a situation most marked in intensive care units (ICUs). Therefore, we aimed to develop and evaluate an interventional tool to improve communication and palliative care, using the ICU as an example of where this is difficult.

METHODS

Our design was a phase I-II study following the Medical Research Council Guidance for the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions and the (Methods of Researching End-of-life Care (MORECare) statement. In two ICUs, with over 1900 admissions annually, phase I modeled a new intervention comprising implementation training and an assessment tool. We conducted a literature review, qualitative interviews, and focus groups with 40 staff and 13 family members. This resulted in the new tool, the Psychosocial Assessment and Communication Evaluation (PACE). Phase II evaluated the feasibility and effects of PACE, using observation, record audit, and surveys of staff and family members. Qualitative data were analyzed using the framework approach. The statistical tests used on quantitative data were t-tests (for normally distributed characteristics), the χ2 or Fisher's exact test (for non-normally distributed characteristics) and the Mann-Whitney U-test (for experience assessments) to compare the characteristics and experience for cases with and without PACE recorded.

RESULTS

PACE provides individualized assessments of all patients entering the ICU. It is completed within 24 to 48 hours of admission, and covers five aspects (key relationships, social details and needs, patient preferences, communication and information status, and other concerns), followed by recording of an ongoing communication evaluation. Implementation is supported by a training program with specialist palliative care. A post-implementation survey of 95 ICU staff found that 89% rated PACE assessment as very or generally useful. Of 213 family members, 165 (78%) responded to their survey, and two-thirds had PACE completed. Those for whom PACE was completed reported significantly higher satisfaction with symptom control, and the honesty and consistency of information from staff (Mann-Whitney U-test ranged from 616 to 1247, P-values ranged from 0.041 to 0.010) compared with those who did not.

CONCLUSIONS

PACE is a feasible interventional tool that has the potential to improve communication, information consistency, and family perceptions of symptom control.

Ambulatory diagnosis and treatment of nonmalignant pain in the United States, 2000-2010

BACKGROUND

Escalating rates of prescription opioid use and abuse have occurred in the context of efforts to improve the treatment of nonmalignant pain.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to characterize the diagnosis and management of nonmalignant pain in ambulatory, office-based settings in the United States between 2000 and 2010.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Serial cross-sectional and multivariate regression analyses of the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS), a nationally representative audit of office-based physician visits, were conducted.

MEASURES

(1) Annual visit volume among adults with primary pain symptom or diagnosis; (2) receipt of any pain treatment; and (3) receipt of prescription opioid or nonopioid pharmacologic therapy in visits for new musculoskeletal pain.

RESULTS

Primary symptoms or diagnoses of pain consistently represented one-fifth of visits, varying little from 2000 to 2010. Among all pain visits, opioid prescribing nearly doubled from 11.3% to 19.6%, whereas nonopioid analgesic prescribing remained unchanged (26%-29% of visits). One-half of new musculoskeletal pain visits resulted in pharmacologic treatment, although the prescribing of nonopioid pharmacotherapies decreased from 38% of visits (2000) to 29% of visits (2010). After adjusting for potentially confounding covariates, few patient, physician, or practice characteristics were associated with a prescription opioid rather than a nonopioid analgesic for new musculoskeletal pain, and increases in opioid prescribing generally occurred nonselectively over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased opioid prescribing has not been accompanied by similar increases in nonopioid analgesics or the proportion of ambulatory pain patients receiving pharmacologic treatment. Clinical alternatives to prescription opioids may be underutilized as a means of treating ambulatory nonmalignant pain.

Pedometer-based internet-mediated intervention for adults with chronic low back pain: randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain, especially back pain, is a prevalent condition that is associated with disability, poor health status, anxiety and depression, decreased quality of life, and increased health services use and costs. Current evidence suggests that exercise is an effective strategy for managing chronic pain. However, there are few clinical programs that use generally available tools and a relatively low-cost approach to help patients with chronic back pain initiate and maintain an exercise program.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to determine whether a pedometer-based, Internet-mediated intervention can reduce chronic back pain-related disability.

METHODS

A parallel group randomized controlled trial was conducted with 1:1 allocation to the intervention or usual care group. 229 veterans with nonspecific chronic back pain were recruited from one Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system. Participants randomized to the intervention received an uploading pedometer and had access to a website that provided automated walking goals, feedback, motivational messages, and social support through an e-community (n=111). Usual care participants (n=118) also received the uploading pedometer but did not receive the automated feedback or have access to the website. The primary outcome was measured using the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) at 6 months (secondary) and 12 months (primary) with a difference in mean scores of at least 2 considered clinically meaningful. Both a complete case and all case analysis, using linear mixed effects models, were conducted to assess differences between study groups at both time points.

RESULTS

Baseline mean RDQ scores were greater than 9 in both groups. Primary outcome data were provided by approximately 90% of intervention and usual care participants at both 6 and 12 months. At 6 months, average RDQ scores were 7.2 for intervention participants compared to 9.2 for usual care, an adjusted difference of 1.6 (95% CI 0.3-2.8, P=.02) for the complete case analysis and 1.2 (95% CI -0.09 to 2.5, P=.07) for the all case analysis. A post hoc analysis of patients with baseline RDQ scores ≥4 revealed even larger adjusted differences between groups at 6 months but at 12 months the differences were no longer statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Intervention participants, compared with those receiving usual care, reported a greater decrease in back pain-related disability in the 6 months following study enrollment. Between-group differences were especially prominent for patients reporting greater baseline levels of disability but did not persist over 12 months. Primarily, automated interventions may be an efficient way to assist patients with managing chronic back pain; additional support may be needed to ensure continuing improvements.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00694018; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00694018 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6IsG4Y90E).

Screening for pain in pediatric brain tumor survivors using the pain thermometer

Numerous instruments have been developed to measure pain within various populations; however, there remains limited understanding of how these tools are applicable to childhood cancer survivors. This study compared a single-item screening measure, the Pain Thermometer (PT), with a more in-depth measure, the Brief Pain Survey (BPS), in a cohort of childhood brain tumor survivors. Ninety-nine survivors (aged 13-32 years) with a median time from diagnosis of 9.9 years (range = 2-18 years) completed the 2 instruments. Thirty-seven survivors (37.4%) were identified on the BPS as having clinically significant pain, but the PT was not found to be an accurate tool for identifying these pain cases. Application of receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of PT ratings against BPS criterion indicated overall concordance between measures. No cutoff score on the PT were identified that resulted in acceptable sensitivity, meaning pain cases identified on the BPS would be missed on the PT. Findings suggest that a multi-item screening measure may better identify clinically significant pain in childhood brain tumor survivors compared with a 1-item screening measure alone.

Pain assessment during a vaso-occlusive crisis in the pediatric and adolescent patient: rethinking practice

Pain assessment of the child and adolescent with sickle cell disease is complex and challenging. We present a paradigm of pain assessment during a vaso-occlusive crisis in children and adolescents based on the Pain Assessment as a Social Transaction model. Using this model, the assessment of pain severity in sickle cell disease is uniquely highlighted as comprising at least 4 key factors: the limitations of current pain assessment tools, the existence of acute pain of various origins and the emergence and coexistence of chronic pain, the prevalence of cognitive deficits, and the sociocultural dynamics in America. Improved tools for pain assessment and targeted practitioner education are warranted.

A national study of racial differences in pain screening rates in the VA health care system

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether black patients are less likely to be screened for pain than white patients.

PARTICIPANTS

A sample of 25,382 black and 220,122 non-Hispanic white Veterans Affairs (VA) patients was identified among the panel surveyed in the ambulatory care module of the 2007 Survey of Health Care Experiences of Patients.

DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional analysis of documentation of a pain score in the electronic medical record at the patient's Survey of Health Care Experiences of Patients index visit. Hierarchical logistic regression analyses were used to examine the association between race and documentation of pain screening.

RESULTS

After accounting for site and whether the patient was a new or established primary care patient, black VA patients were significantly less likely than their white counterparts to be screened for pain, odds ratio: 0.79, P<0.0001, with estimated screening rates of 78% and 82% for black and white established primary care patients at a typical VA site, respectively. Further adjusting for demographics, medical and psychological comorbidity, prescription of pain medication, and health care utilization reduced the odds ratio to 0.86, P<0.0001). Additional analyses revealed that this reduction in odds ratio was primarily explained by higher rates of outpatient visits to the VA in the previous 2 years among black patients, which was associated with lower rates of screening at the index visit.

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of screening were lower among black patients. The magnitude of this disparity was small and was explained, in part, by racial variation in prior health care utilization.

Agreement between electronic medical record-based and self-administered pain numeric rating scale: clinical and research implications

BACKGROUND

Pain screening may improve the quality of care by identifying patients in need of further assessment and management. Many health care systems use the numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain screening, and record the score in the patients' electronic medical record (EMR).

OBJECTIVE

Determine the level of agreement between EMR and patient survey NRS, and whether discrepancies vary by demographic and clinical characteristics.

METHODS

We linked survey data from a sample of veterans receiving care in 8 Veterans Affairs medical facilities, to EMR data including an NRS collected on the day of the survey to compare responses to the NRS question from these 2 sources. We assessed correlation, agreement on clinical cut-points (eg, severe), and, using the survey as the gold standard, whether patient characteristics were associated with a discrepancy on moderate-severe pain.

RESULTS

A total of 1643 participants had a survey and EMR NRS score on the same day. The correlation was 0.56 (95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.59), but the mean EMR score was significantly lower than the survey score (1.72 vs. 2.79; P<0.0001). Agreement was moderate (κ=0.35). Characteristics associated with an increased odds of a discrepancy included: diabetes [adjusted odds ratio (AOR)=1.48], posttraumatic stress disorder (AOR=1.59), major depressive disorder (AOR=1.81), other race versus white (AOR=2.29), and facility in which care was received.

CONCLUSIONS

The underestimation of pain using EMR data, especially clinically actionable levels of pain, has important clinical and research implications. Improving the quality of pain care may require better screening.

[The experiences of intensive care nurses in the assessment and intervention of pain relief in children]

Descriptive survey of daily practical experiences of pediatric nurses in the assessment and intervention to pain relief in children, during nursing care provided in pediatric and neonatal intensive care units, and the influence of the infrastructure of care and system organization. The sample was made up of 109 nurses. The principal results indicated that the majority of the nurses considered the academic training obtained as insufficient to support this aspect of nursing care; that they had not received local training in evaluating pain or in relief interventions; that the staff ratio is inadequate and as well as the availability of institutional guidelines to improve the quality of analgesia. It was concluded that nurses value the assessment and intervention to pain relief in children, but describe aspects which compromise practice: lack of collaborative practice, lack of processes definition, lack of formal and continuing education and lack of infrastructure. These aspects compromise the implementation of scientific evidences capable of improving practical aspects of analgesia in children under intensive care.

Educational needs of health care providers working in long-term care facilities with regard to pain management

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of chronic pain ranges from 40% to 80% in long-term care facilities (LTCF), with the highest proportion being found among older adults and residents with dementia. Unfortunately, pain in older adults is underdiagnosed, undertreated, inadequately treated or not treated at all. A solution to this problem would be to provide effective and innovative interdisciplinary continuing education to health care providers (HCPs).

OBJECTIVE

To identify the educational needs of HCPs working in LTCF with regard to pain management.

METHODS

A qualitative research design using the nominal group technique was undertaken. Seventy-two HCPs (21 physicians⁄pharmacists, 15 occupational⁄physical therapists, 24 nurses and 21 orderlies) were recruited from three LTCF in Quebec. Each participant was asked to provide and prioritize a list of the most important topics to be addressed within a continuing education program on chronic pain management in LTCF.

RESULTS

Forty topics were generated across all groups, and six specific topics were common to at least three out of the four HCP groups. Educational need in pain assessment was ranked the highest by all groups. Other highly rated topics included pharmacological treatment of pain, pain neurophysiology, nonpharmacological treatments and how to distinguish pain expression from other behaviours.

CONCLUSION

The present study showed that despite an average of more than 10 years of work experience in LTCF, HCPs have significant educational needs in pain management, especially pain assessment. These results will help in the development of a comprehensive pain management educational program for HCPs in LTCF.

Preliminary validation of the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale (DVPRS) in a military population

BACKGROUND

The Army Surgeon General released the Pain Management Task Force final report in May 2010. Among military providers, concerns were raised that the standard numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain was inconsistently administered and of questionable clinical value. In response, the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale (DVPRS) was developed.

METHODS

The instrument design integrates pain rating scale features to improve interpretability of incremental pain intensity levels, and to improve communication and documentation across all transitions of care. A convenience sample of 350 inpatient and outpatient active duty or retired military service members participated in the study at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. Participants completed the five-item DVPRS-one pain intensity NRS with and without word descriptors presented in random order and four supplemental items measuring general activity, sleep, mood, and level of stress and the Brief Pain Inventory seven interference items. Using systematic sampling, a random sample was selected for a word descriptor validation procedure matching word phases to corresponding pain intensity on the NRS.

RESULTS

Parallel forms reliability and concurrent validity testing demonstrated a robust correlation. When the DVPRS was presented with the word descriptors first, the correlation between the two ratings was slightly higher, r = 0.929 (N = 171; P < 0.001), than ordering first without the descriptors, r = 0.882 (N = 177; P < 0.001). Intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.943 showing excellent alignment of word descriptors by respondents (N = 42), matching them correctly with pain level.

CONCLUSIONS

The DVPRS tool demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties in a military population.

Measuring Pain in Outpatient Surgical Patients: Variation Resulting from Instrument Choice

Our hypothesis is that the type of instrument will affect variation in pain assessment. A sample of 269 patients administered the visual analog pain scale (VAS) and the generic quality-of-life instrument, and the SF-36 were evaluated for gender, age, the VAS score and the bodily pain domain of the SF-36 (BP-SF-36) score, primary surgical diagnosis, preoperative or postoperative status, and type of operation. Patients were grouped into preoperative (Preop) and postoperative (postop) status and those with chronic pain (CP) conditions and acute/no pain (AP) conditions. Linear regression analysis showed statistically significant (all P value ≤ 0.0006) correlations between the VAS and BP-SF-36 scores all patients, preoperative patients, postoperative patients, acute pain patients, and chronic pain patients. However, the strength of these correlations were moderate (r values between 0.51 and 0.61). Preoperative had more pain compared with postoperative patients as measured by both the VAS and BP-SF-36 ( P = 0.05). Similarly, chronic pain patients had more pain compared with acute pain patients as measured by both scales ( P < 0.0001). Although there are statistically significant associations between the BP-SF-36 and VAS, the correlations are moderate. Different instruments may measure different aspects of pain and the precision with which pain is measured in surgical patients.

Investigating pain in heart failure patients: the pain assessment, incidence, and nature in heart failure (PAIN-HF) study

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced heart failure (HF) have high rates of pain and other symptoms that diminish quality of life. We know little about the characteristics and correlates of pain in patients with advanced HF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We identified pain prevalence, location, character, severity, frequency, and correlates in 347 outpatients with advanced HF enrolled from hospices and clinics. We evaluated the correlation of pain with HF-related quality of life, mortality, symptoms and health problems, and current treatments for pain. Pain at any site was reported by 293 patients (84.4%), and 138 (39.5%) reported pain at more than one site. The most common site of pain was the legs below the knees (32.3% of subjects). Pain interfered with activity for 70% of patients. Pain was "severe" or "very severe" for 28.6% of subjects with chest pain, and for 38.9% of those with other sites of pain. The only medication reported to provide pain relief was opioids, prescribed for 34.1% of subjects (P = .001). The strongest predictors of pain were degenerative joint disease (DJD) (odds ratio [OR] 14.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.9-56.0; P < .001), other arthritis (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.20-6.62; P = .017), shortness of breath (OR 3.27, 95% CI 1.47-7.28; P = .004), and angina pectoris (OR 3.38, 95% CI 1.30-8.81; P = .013).

CONCLUSIONS

Pain occurred at multiple sites in patients with advanced HF. Pain correlated with DJD or other arthritis, shortness of breath, and angina. Only opioid analgesics provided relief of pain. Future research should evaluate the etiology of and interventions to manage pain in patients with HF.

Empirical review supporting the application of the "pain assessment as a social transaction" model in pediatrics

Despite decades of research, national mandates, and widespread implementation of guidelines, recent reports suggest that the quality of pain assessment and management in hospitalized children remains suboptimal. The mismatch between what is advocated and what is done in practice has led experts to argue for a conceptual shift in thinking, where the pain assessment process is viewed from a complex social communication or transaction framework. This article examines the empirical evidence from the recent pediatric pain assessment and decision-making literature that supports adaptation of Schiavenato and Craig's "Pain Assessment as a Social Transaction" model in explaining pediatric acute pain management decisions. Multiple factors contributing to children's pain experiences and expressions are explored, and some of the difficulties interpreting their pain scores are exposed. Gaps in knowledge related to nurses' clinical pain management decisions are identified, and the importance of children's and parents' preferences and roles and the influence of risks and adverse events on decision making are identified. This review highlights the complexity of pediatric nurses' pain management decisions toward the clinical goal of improving comfort while minimizing risk. Further study evaluating the propositions related to nurses' decisions to intervene is needed in pediatric clinical settings to better synthesize this model for children.

Do high symptom scores trigger clinical actions? An audit after implementing electronic symptom screening

PURPOSE

Standardized, electronic, symptom assessment is purported to help identify symptom needs. However, little research examines clinical processes related to symptom management, such as whether patients with worsening symptoms receive clinical actions more often. This study examined whether patient visits with higher symptom scores are associated with higher rates of symptom documentation in the chart and symptom-specific actions being taken.

METHODS

Retrospective chart reviews on cancer patient visits at a regional cancer center. An electronic Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), a validated tool to measure symptoms, was implemented center-wide to standardize symptom screening at every patient visit. The independent variable was ESAS scores for pain and shortness of breath, categorized by severity: 0 (none), 1-3, 4-6, 7-10 (severe). Outcomes included symptom documentation in the chart on the visit date and symptom-related action(s) taken within 1 week.

RESULTS

Nine hundred twelve visits were identified. Pain and shortness of breath were documented in 51.8% and 29.7% of charts, and a related-action occurred in 16.9% and 3.9% of charts, respectively. As ESAS severity score category increased from none to severe, the proportion of visits with pain documented increased significantly (36.9%, 49.2%, 55.2%, and 71.4%; P < .001). Likewise, as ESAS score severity increased, the proportion of visits with a pain-related action increased significantly (4.2%, 10.6%, 21.3%, and 37.0%; P < .001). Trends were similar for shortness of breath.

CONCLUSION

Results show a positive association between higher symptom scores and higher rates of documentation and clinical actions taken. However, symptom-related actions were documented in a minority of visits in which symptoms were noted as severe.

The practitioner proposes a treatment change and the patient declines: what to do next?

OBJECTIVE

This study describes how pain practitioners can elicit the beliefs that are responsible for patients' judgments against considering a treatment change and activate collaborative decision making.

METHODS

Beliefs of 139 chronic pain patients who are in treatment but continue to experience significant pain were reduced to 7 items about the significance of pain on the patient's life. The items were aggregated into 4 decision models that predict which patients are actually considering a change in their current treatment.

RESULTS

While only 34% of study participants were considering a treatment change overall, the percentage ranged from 20 to 70, depending on their ratings about current consequences of pain, emotional influence, and long-term impact. Generalized linear model analysis confirmed that a simple additive model of these 3 beliefs is the best predictor.

CONCLUSION

Initial opposition to a treatment change is a conditional judgment and subject to change as specific beliefs become incompatible with patients' current conditions. These beliefs can be elicited through dialog by asking 3 questions.

How much time do low-income patients and primary care physicians actually spend discussing pain? A direct observation study

BACKGROUND

We know little about how much time low-income patients and physicians spend discussing pain during primary care visits.

OBJECTIVE

To measure the frequency and duration of pain-related discussions at a primary care clinic serving mostly low-income black patients; to investigate variables associated with these discussions.

DESIGN

We measured the frequency and duration of pain-related discussions using video-recorded primary care visits; we used multiple regression to evaluate associations between discussions and patient self-report variables.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 133 patients presenting to a primary care clinic for any reason; 17 family medicine residents.

MAIN MEASURES

Independent variables were pain severity, health status, physical function, chief complaint, and whether the patient and physician had met previously. Dependent variables were presence of pain-related discussions and percent of total visit time spent discussing pain.

KEY RESULTS

Sixty-nine percent of visits included pain-related discussions with a mean duration of 5.9 min (34% of total visit time). Increasing pain severity [OR 1.69, 95% CI (1.18, 2.41)] and pain-related chief complaints [OR 4.10, 95% CI (1.39, 12.12)] were positively associated with the probability of discussing pain. When patients discussed pain, they spent 4.5% more [95% CI (0.60, 8.37)] total visit time discussing pain for every one-point increase in pain severity. Better physical function was negatively associated with the probability of discussing pain [OR 0.65, 95% CI (0.48, 0.86)], but positively associated with the percent of total visit time spent discussing pain [3% increase; 95% CI (0.32, 5.75)] for every one-point increase in physical function). Patients and physicians who had met previously spent 11% less [95% CI (-21.65, -0.55)] total visit time discussing pain. Pain severity was positively associated with time spent discussing pain only when patients and physicians had not met previously.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain-related discussions comprise a substantial proportion of time during primary care visits. Future research should evaluate the relationship between time spent discussing pain and the quality of primary care pain management.

Objective evidence of severe disease: opioid use in chronic pain

Treating chronic pain presents numerous challenges. First, assessing patients with chronic pain is complicated by the lack of objective measures of pain itself. Chronic pain guidelines already developed by national organizations rely on careful history taking rather than objective measures. Second, opioids are an accepted element of chronic pain management, but their use is tempered by risks of overdose, dependency, and the potential for diversion. This essay proposes a new standard for the use of long-term opioids for chronic pain: the presence or absence of objective evidence of severe disease. This standard, which supports responsible prescribing of opioids, is one that clinicians can understand and apply when considering prescribing long-term opioids for chronic pain. Until we have measures of pain itself, we should insist upon objective evidence of severe disease before prescribing opioids for chronic pain.

Acute pain in undergraduate medical education: an unfinished chapter!

Inadequately treated acute pain is a global healthcare problem that causes significant patient suffering and disability, risk of chronicity, increased resource utilization, and escalating healthcare costs. Compounding the problem is the lack of adequate instruction in acute pain management available in medical schools worldwide. Incorporating acute pain diagnosis and management as an integral part of the medical school curriculum will allow physicians to develop a more comprehensive, compassionate approach to treating patients with acute pain syndromes and should be considered a healthcare imperative. In this article, we review the current status of pain education in educational institutions across the world, focusing on achievements, lacunae, and inadequacies. We appeal to all concerned--pain management specialists, health educators, and policymakers--to consider incorporating education on acute pain and its management at undergraduate medical levels in an integrated manner.

Measuring pain impact versus pain severity using a numeric rating scale

BACKGROUND

Routine assessments of pain using an intensity numeric rating scale (NRS) have improved documentation, but have not improved clinical outcomes. This may be, in part, due to the failure of the NRS to adequately predict patients' preferences for additional treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether patients' illness perceptions have a stronger association with patient treatment preferences than the pain intensity NRS.

DESIGN

Single face-to-face interview.

PARTICIPANTS

Outpatients with chronic, noncancer, musculoskeletal pain.

MAIN MEASURES

Experience of pain was measured using 18 illness perception items. Factor analysis of these items found that five factors accounted for 67.1% of the variance; 38% of the variance was accounted for by a single factor labeled "pain impact." Generalized linear models were used to examine how NRS scores and physical function compare with pain impact in predicting preferences for highly effective/high-risk treatment.

KEY RESULTS

Two hundred forty-nine subjects agreed to participate. Neither NRS nor functioning predicted patient preference (NRS: χ2 = 1.92, df = 1, p = 0.16, physical functioning: χ2 = 2.48, df = 1, p = 0.11). In contrast, pain impact was significantly associated with the preference for a riskier/more effective treatment after adjusting for age, comorbidity, efficacy of current medications and numeracy (χ2 = 4.40, df = 1, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Tools that measure the impact of pain may be a more valuable screening instrument than the NRS. Further research is now needed to determine if measuring the impact of pain in clinical practice is more effective at triggering appropriate management than more restricted measures of pain such as the NRS.

From documentation to the problem: controlling postoperative pain

PROBLEM

Adequate pain control continues to be an enigma in the face of the Joint Commission (TJC) well-intended pain management standards. Notable in the pain standards is the mandate to make pain the fifth vital sign to increase pain visibility and awareness.

METHOD

The following databases were searched: EBSCOHost, CINHAL, PubMed Central, Medline, and government/societies sites for guidelines on pain control. Various search terms used included pain, post operative pain, pain control, pain as the 5th vital sign, pain documentation, pain assessment, Joint Commission Pain Standard, PRN effectiveness, and pay-for-performance.

FINDINGS

Accredited facilities are mandated to have plans to assess for pain and evaluate pain management effectiveness. These mandates have necessitated a flurry of initiatives and programs by hospitals and healthcare facilities focusing on documentation processes to meet TJC compliance. Notable programs include Pain as the 5th Vital Sign and PRN (as needed) effectiveness documentation. Many facilities have programs to assess and document pain but lack programs that effectively control patient's pain.

CONCLUSION

This article is a call for facilities to refocus on pain control. A need to evaluate current programs by facilities is evident. Studies show that Pain as the 5(th) Vital Sign and PRN effectiveness documentation are not effective and invariably have not met the goals of TJC pain standard--adequate and effective pain control.

Implementation of the veterans health administration national pain management strategy

Since its introduction in 1998, the VHA National Pain Management Strategy has introduced and implemented a series of plans for promoting systems improvements in pain care. We present the milestones of VHA efforts in pain management as reflected by the work of the Strategy. This includes the development of the Strategy and its current structure as well as a review of important initiatives such as "pain as the fifth vital sign" and the stepped care model of pain management.

Primary care clinician adherence to guidelines for the management of chronic musculoskeletal pain: results from the study of the effectiveness of a collaborative approach to pain

OBJECTIVE

We assessed primary care clinician-provided guideline-concordant care as documented in patients' medical records, predictors of documented guideline-concordant care, and its association with pain-related functioning. Patients were participants in a randomized trial of collaborative care for chronic musculoskeletal pain. The intervention featured patient and primary care clinician education, symptom monitoring and feedback to clinicians by the intervention team.

METHODS

To assess concordance with the evidence-based treatment guidelines upon which our intervention was based, we developed an 8-item chart review tool, the Pain Process Checklist (PPC). We then reviewed electronic medical records for 365 veteran patients treated by 42 primary care clinicians over 12 months. Intervention status, demographic, and clinical variables were tested as predictors of PPC scores using generalized estimating equations (GEE). GEE was also used to test whether PPC scores predicted treatment response (≥30% decrease in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire score).

RESULTS

Rates of documented guideline-concordant care varied widely among PPC items, from 94% of patients having pain addressed to 17% of patients on opioids having side effects addressed. Intervention status was unrelated to item scores, and PPC-7 totals did not differ significantly between intervention and treatment-as-usual patients (61.2%, standard error [SE] = 3.3% vs 55.2%, SE = 2.6%, P = 0.15). In a multivariate model, higher PPC-7 scores were associated with receiving a prescription for opioids (odds ratio [OR] = 1.07, P = 0.007) and lower PPC-7 scores with patient age (10-year difference OR = 0.97, P = 0.004). Finally, intervention patients who received quantitative pain and depression assessments were less likely to respond to treatment (assessed vs not: 18% vs 33%, P = 0.008, and 13% vs 28%, P = 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

As measured by medical record review, additional training and clinician feedback did not increase provision of documented guideline-concordant pain care, and adherence to guidelines by primary care clinicians did not improve clinical outcomes for patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.

Defining racial and ethnic disparities in pain management

BACKGROUND

Substantial pain prevalence is as high as 40% in community populations. There is consistent evidence that racial/ethnic minority individuals are overrepresented among those who experience such pain and whose pain management is inadequate.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The objectives of this paper are to (1) define parameters of and summarize evidence pertinent to racial/ethnic minority disparities in pain management, (2) identify factors contributing to observed disparities, and (3) identify strategies to minimize the disparities.

METHODS

Scientific literature was selectively reviewed addressing pain epidemiology, differences in pain management of non-Hispanic whites versus racial/ethnic minority groups, and patient and physician factors contributing to such differences.

RESULTS

Racial/ethnic minorities consistently receive less adequate treatment for acute and chronic pain than non-Hispanic whites, even after controlling for age, gender, and pain intensity. Pain intensity underreporting appears to be a major contribution of minority individuals to pain management disparities. The major contribution by physicians to such disparities appears to reflect limited awareness of their own cultural beliefs and stereotypes regarding pain, minority individuals, and use of narcotic analgesics.

CONCLUSIONS

Racial/ethnic minority patients with pain need to be empowered to accurately report pain intensity levels, and physicians who treat such patients need to acknowledge their own belief systems regarding pain and develop strategies to overcome unconscious, but potentially harmful, negative stereotyping of minority patients.

[The nurse providing care to trauma victims in pain: the fifth vital sign]

This qualitative study evaluated nurses' knowledge regarding pain in trauma victims. This study was developed at a public hospital, using a questionnaire and a knowledge test, both of which were treated using Content Analysis. The sample as comprised by 27 nurses, mainly women (92.6%), with an average age of 31±10.3 years and most with less than one year since their graduation (51.8%). Results evinced pain as an unpleasant sensation, a warning sign and a subjective experience. Pain measurement is seen from subjective and objective perspectives. Most nurses (59.3%) are not familiar with the evaluation instruments and, among those with some familiarity, the numerical scale was the most referred. The strategies for pain control mentioned by the nurses were measured as pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic and associated. All nurses considered that pain measurement is important and that is a pathway to a humanized and qualified treatment that guides the therapeutic conduct and reestablished the patients' well-being.

Pain assessment as a social transaction: beyond the "gold standard"

Pain assessment conventionally has been viewed hierarchically with self-report as its "gold-standard." Recent attempts to improve pain management have focused on the importance of assessment, for example, the initiative to include pain as the "fifth vital sign." We question the focus in the conceptualization of pain assessment upon a "vital sign," not in terms of the importance of assessment, but in terms of the application of self-report as a mechanistic index akin to a biologic measure such as heart rate and blood pressure. We synthesize current inclusive models of pain and pain assessment and propose a more comprehensive conceptualization of pain assessment as a transaction based on an organismic interplay between the patient and clinician.

Nursing staff, patient, and environmental factors associated with accurate pain assessment

CONTEXT

Although pain ranks highly among reasons for seeking care, routine pain assessment is often inaccurate.

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated factors associated with nurses (e.g., registered) and other nursing support staff (e.g., licensed vocational nurses and health technicians) discordance with patients in estimates of pain in a health system where routine pain screening using a 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS) is mandated.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional, visit-based, cohort study that included surveys of clinic outpatients (n=465) and nursing staff (n=94) who screened for pain as part of routine vital sign measurement during intake. These data were supplemented by chart review. We compared patient pain levels documented by the nursing staff (N-NRS) with those reported by the patient during the study survey (S-NRS).

RESULTS

Pain underestimation (N-NRS<S-NRS) occurred in 25% and overestimation (N-NRS>S-NRS) in 7% of the cases. Nursing staff used informal pain-screening techniques that did not follow established NRS protocols in half of the encounters. Pain underestimation was positively associated with more years of nursing staff work experience and patient anxiety or post-traumatic stress disorder and negatively associated with better patient-reported health status. Pain overestimation was positively associated with nursing staff's use of the full NRS protocol and with a distracting environment in which patient vitals were taken.

CONCLUSION

Despite a long-standing mandate, pain-screening implementation falls short, and informal screening is common.

Veterans walk to beat back pain: study rationale, design and protocol of a randomized trial of a pedometer-based internet mediated intervention for patients with chronic low back pain

Background

Chronic back pain is a significant problem worldwide and may be especially prevalent among patients receiving care in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system. Back pain affects adults at all ages and is associated with disability, lost workplace productivity, functional limitations and social isolation. Exercise is one of the most effective strategies for managing chronic back pain. Yet, there are few clinical programs that use low cost approaches to help patients with chronic back pain initiate and maintain an exercise program.

Methods/Design

We describe the design and rationale of a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy of a pedometer-based Internet mediated intervention for patients with chronic back pain. The intervention uses an enhanced pedometer, website and e-community to assist these patients with initiating and maintaining a regular walking program with the primary aim of reducing pain-related disability and functional interference. The study specific aims are: 1) To determine whether a pedometer-based Internet-mediated intervention reduces pain-related functional interference among patients with chronic back pain in the short term and over a 12-month timeframe. 2) To assess the effect of the intervention on walking (measured by step counts), quality of life, pain intensity, pain related fear and self-efficacy for exercise. 3) To identify factors associated with a sustained increase in walking over a 12-month timeframe among patients randomized to the intervention.

Discussion

Exercise is an integral part of managing chronic back pain but to be effective requires that patients actively participate in the management process. This intervention is designed to increase activity levels, improve functional status and make exercise programs more accessible for a broad range of patients with chronic back pain.

Trial Registration Number

NCT00694018

Does screening for pain correspond to high quality care for veterans?

BACKGROUND

Routine numeric screening for pain is widely recommended, but its association with overall quality of pain care is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To assess adherence to measures of pain management quality and identify associated patient and provider factors.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional visit-based study.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred and forty adult VA outpatient primary care clinic patients reporting a numeric rating scale (NRS) of moderate to severe pain (four or more on a zero to ten scale). Seventy-seven providers completed a baseline survey regarding general pain management attitudes and a post-visit survey regarding management of 112 participating patients.

MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS

We used chart review to determine adherence to four validated process quality indicators (QIs) including noting pain presence, pain character, and pain control, and intensifying pharmacological intervention. The average NRS was 6.7. Seventy-three percent of charts noted the presence of pain, 13.9% the character, 23.6% the degree of control, and 15.3% increased pain medication prescription. Charts were more likely to include documentation of pain presence if providers agreed that "patients want me to ask about pain" and "pain can have negative consequences on patient's functioning". Charts were more likely to document character of pain if providers agreed that "patients are able to rate their pain". Patients with musculoskeletal pain were less likely to have chart documentation of character of pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite routine pain screening in VA, providers seldom documented elements considered important to evaluation and treatment of pain. Improving pain care may require attention to all aspects of pain management, not just screening.

Diagnostic criteria in patients with complex regional pain syndrome assessed in an out-patient clinic

BACKGROUND

Specific criteria have been described and accepted worldwide for diagnosing patients with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). Nevertheless, a clear-cut diagnosis cannot be confirmed in a number of cases.

AIM

The objective of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of the described diagnostic criteria used by several clinical disciplines.

METHODS

We included 195 patients who were referred to our pain clinic within a period of 1 year. Data were collected on patient characteristics, signs, symptoms, disease-related medication, and the background of the referring clinicians.

RESULTS

The Harden and Bruehl criteria were confirmed in 95 patients (49%). These patients used a higher than average number of analgesics, opiates, and anti-oxidants, and frequently received prescriptions for benzodiazepines instead of anti-depressants. The mean disease duration was 29 +/- 4.6 months and the mean visual analogue score for pain was 8.1 +/- 0.19. A subgroup of patients had a colder temperature in the affected extremity compared with the unaffected extremity. This subgroup showed a longer disease duration and higher visual analogue scale pain.

CONCLUSION

The diagnostic criteria used to determine CRPS should be further improved. A large number of referred patients experienced substantial pain, without receiving adequate medication. Disease-related medication is unrelated to CRPS-specific disease activity. Knowledge of underlying mechanisms is warranted before an adequate pharmaceutical intervention can be considered.