Patient expectations for pain relief in the ED

Implementation of a novel emergency department pain coach educator program: First year experience and evaluation

Background

The ongoing opioid epidemic and rising number of patients with chronic pain have highlighted the need for alternative and integrative pain management approaches. A number of evidence-based nonpharmacologic pain management strategies are available; however, these approaches remain underutilized due to barriers such as time limitations, cost, and lack of clinician training. The aim of this work was to implement a nonpharmacologic pain coach educator program that addresses these barriers. We report an evaluation of the first year of program implementation in the emergency department of a large safety-net hospital.

Methods

We implemented a multimodal pain coach educator program that included education on pain neuroscience and over-the-counter analgesic options, demonstration of integrative techniques, and nonpharmacologic toolkits for home use. Implementation strategies included electronic health record tools, training and promotion, clinical champions, and clinician recognition. We used the RE-AIM framework to guide evaluation of the first year of program implementation using data from the electronic health record, quantitative and qualitative program records, and patient-reported outcomes.

Results

In the first year of program implementation 550 pain coach educator sessions were conducted. Upon immediate session completion, 61% of patients felt the program was helpful, 39% were unsure at the time, and none reported session was not helpful. Clinician feedback was overwhelmingly positive. Program cost per patient was $344.35. Adaptations to first year intervention and implementation strategies included modifications of session delivery timing for accommodation of clinical workflows, additions to program content to align with patient characteristics, and changes to patient identification strategies in response to the coronavirus 19 pandemic.

Conclusions

The PAMI pain coach educator program provides a model for nonpharmacologic pain management programs which can be scaled up and adapted for other settings. This work demonstrates the importance of intervention and implementation strategy adaptations to enhance program reach and effectiveness.

Assessment of patients' satisfaction with the postanesthesia care unit service at University Hospital in Al Khobar, KSA

Objectives

The quality of health care is individually and subjectively reflected through patients' level of satisfaction, as well as the optimality and effectiveness of the provided postoperative pain management. The provision of postanesthesia care unit (PACU) service in hospitals has led to overall positive outcomes, in addition to the enhancement of patients' satisfaction with the provided pain management service. This study assessed patients' level of satisfaction with PACU service at a university hospital and discussed different factors that might have contributed to the level of satisfaction.

Methods

A prospective cross-sectional study was carried out among patients after being discharged from PACU. The study took place at King Fahad Hospital of the University in Al Khobar, KSA between November 2021 and February 2022. The data were collected using a three-section predesigned questionnaire.

Results

Two hundred patients were included in this study. Nearly all patients (95.5%) were satisfied with the provided pain management service. Almost all patients (99.5%) indicated that the PACU staff was courteous and professional during the entire pain management service. More patients complained about pain before using analgesia and this difference was statistically significant (Z = 8.642; p < 0.001). The satisfaction rate was significantly higher in the older age group (>45 years) (Z = 2.114; p = 0.035), in patients with American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) 3 physical status (H = 13.130; p = 0.001), and those with a previous surgical history (Z = 2.139; p = 0.032).

Conclusion

This study concluded that the level of patients' satisfaction with PACU service was high, and established a statistically significant association with age, ASA score, and previous surgical history. Healthcare providers should consider patient education and effective communication to increase patients' satisfaction level and improve the overall quality of care.

Effectiveness of and Patient’s Satisfaction with Dental Emergency Unit in Pitié Salpêtrière Hospital (Paris), Focusing on Pain and Anxiety

Background

The Dental Emergency Unit (DEU) of the Pitié Salpêtrière Hospital receives mainly painful emergencies. This study aimed at evaluating the suppression of pain and anxiety as well as the patient's satisfaction after a visit to the DEU. Patients and Methods. A prospective study was carried out in 2019 (NCT03819036) in adult patients. Data was collected on D0 on site and then on D1, D3, and D7 by phone, during daytime. The main objective and secondary objectives were, respectively, to assess the intensity of pain on D1; the intensity of pain on D3 and D7; the evolution of anxiety on D1, D3, and D7; and the patients' satisfaction. They were evaluated with a 0–10 numeric scale (NS) on D1, D3 and D7; mean scores were compared with nonparametric statistics (ANOVA, Dunn's test).

Results

814 patients were contacted and 581 patients included; 87 were lost to follow-up. 376 patients completed all the questionnaires. In the final sample (59% men, 40 ± 16 y.o.), 86% had health insurance. The mean pain scores were as follows: D0: 6.36 ± 0.12; D1: 3.49 ± 0.13; D3: 2.23 ± 0.13; D7: 1.07 ± 0.11—indicating a significant decrease of 45%, 65%, and 93% on D1, D3, and D7, respectively, compared to D0 (p < 0.0001) between D0 and D1, D3, D7. The mean NS anxiety scores were as follows: D0: 3.32 ± 0.15; D1: 3.69 ± 0.16; D3: 2.75 ± 0.16; D7: 1.98 ± 0.15. The decrease was significant between D0 and D7 (p < 0.0001). The perception of general heath improved between D1 and D7. The overall score of satisfaction was 8.64 ± 0.06.

Conclusion

DEU enabled a significant reduction in pain and anxiety with high overall satisfaction.

Oral and Topical Treatment of Painful Diabetic Polyneuropathy: Practice Guideline Update Summary: Report of the AAN Guideline Subcommittee

OBJECTIVE

To update the 2011 American Academy of Neurology (AAN) guideline on the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) with a focus on topical and oral medications and medical class effects.

METHODS

The authors systematically searched the literature from January 2008 to April 2020 using a structured review process to classify the evidence and develop practice recommendations using the AAN 2017 Clinical Practice Guideline Process Manual.

RESULTS

Gabapentinoids (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-0.67), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) (SMD 0.47; 95% CI, 0.34-0.60), sodium channel blockers (SMD 0.56; 95% CI, 0.25-0.87), and SNRI/opioid dual mechanism agents (SMD 0.62; 95% CI, 0.38-0.86) all have comparable effect sizes just above or just below our cutoff for a medium effect size (SMD 0.5). Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) (SMD 0.95; 95% CI, 0.15-1.8) have a large effect size, but this result is tempered by a low confidence in the estimate.

RECOMMENDATIONS SUMMARY

Clinicians should assess patients with diabetes for PDN (Level B) and those with PDN for concurrent mood and sleep disorders (Level B). In patients with PDN, clinicians should offer TCAs, SNRIs, gabapentinoids, and/or sodium channel blockers to reduce pain (Level B) and consider factors other than efficacy (Level B). Clinicians should offer patients a trial of medication from a different effective class when they do not achieve meaningful improvement or experience significant adverse effects with the initial therapeutic class (Level B) and not use opioids for the treatment of PDN (Level B).

Nursing staff factors influencing pain management in the emergency department: Both quantity and quality matter

BACKGROUND

Abdominal pain is one of the most common symptoms for presentation to the emergency department (ED). However, administration of analgesics is often delayed and pain reassessment is often missed. We investigated the effect of several nursing staff factors on the time to administer analgesics and pain reassessment in ED.

METHOD

This retrospective descriptive study was conducted in a tertiary hospital in Korea. The subjects were adult patients who visited the ED for abdominal pain and received analgesics in 2019. Nursing staff factors were defined as the nurse-to-patient ratio and the nurse's experience in the ED. Reassessment was classified into three groups: non-reassessment, reassessment in ≤ 1 h, and reassessment in ≥ 1 h. Patient characteristics and the analgesics' name were collected. The effect of nursing staff factors on the administration time was analyzed using a linear mixture model, and the differences in the nurse, and patient characteristics in the three reassessment groups were evaluated using generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

A total of 1428 cases were included, 54.1% of which received opioids. The median time from prescription to administration (TTA) was 16 min, and pain reassessment was conducted in 55.0%. TTA tended to increase as the nurse-to-patient ratio increased. Nurses in the two reassessment groups had more experience than those in the non-assessment group.

CONCLUSION

Both the nurse-to-patient ratio and experience in the ED had a significant impact on pain management. Therefore, appropriate ED nurse staffing levels considering the unpredictable and fluctuating number of patients, and nurse retention strategies are needed.

Non-pharmacological pain management practice and barriers among nurses working in Debre Tabor Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Ethiopia

BACKGROUND

Pain is an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with or resembling that actual or potential tissue damage. Different study findings show that about 55% to 78.6% of inpatients experience moderate-to-severe pain. Nurses are one of the health professional who may hear of pain suffered by the patients and who can manage patient suffering by themselves. Therefore, their correct skill is very important in non- pharmacology and pharmacology pain management methods.

OBJECTIVE

To assess non-pharmacological pain management practice and barriers among nurses working in Debre Tabor Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Ethiopia.

METHODS

Data were collected using structured observational check list with interviewer administered questionnaires that measure nurses' practice on non-pharmacological pain management. Data were entered using Epi Data version 3.1 and analyzed using SPSS (Stastical Package for Social Sciences) version 23. Bivariable and multivariable analysis were conducted to examine the association between independent and outcome variables.

RESULTS

A total of 169 nurses participated in the study, with a response rate of 100%. Among the study participants 94 (55.6%) were females, and the mean age of nurses were 34.9(SD = 5.7) years. Only 44(26%) of nurses had good practice on non- pharmacology pain management methods. About 130(77.55%), 125(74.0%), and 123(72.8%) of nurses reported that inadequate cooperation of physicians, multiple responsibilities of nurses and insufficient number of nurses per patient ratio as barriers for practice of non -pharmacology pain management respectively.

CONCLUSION

Majority of nurses didn't apply non-pharmacological pain management practices for their patients in pain and the overall practice level of nurses was very poor. The major identified obstacle factors for the poor practice of non-pharmacological pain management methods were nurses' fatigue, inadequate cooperation of physicians, heavy workload, multiple responsibilities of nurses, and insufficient number of nurses per patient ratio and unfavorable attitude of nurse on non-pharmacology pain management. Even if nurses experiences different challenges, they shall use non-pharmacological pain management methods complementary to pharmacological treatment of pain as they are low cost and safe. And also boosting nurse's attitude towards the effect of non-pharmacological pain management methods is crucial.

Factors associated with time to first analgesic medication in the emergency department

AIM AND OBJECTIVE

To examine the factors associated with time to first analgesic medication in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND

Pain is the most common symptom presenting to the emergency department, and the time taken to deliver analgesic medication is a common outcome measure. Factors associated with time to first analgesic medication are likely to be multifaceted, but currently poorly described.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

Cox proportional hazards regression modelling was undertaken to evaluate the associations between person, environment, health and illness variables within Symptom Management Theory and time to first analgesic medication in a sample of adult patients presenting with moderate-to-severe pain to an emergency department over twelve months. This study was completed in line with the STROBE statement.

RESULTS

383 patients were included in the study, 290 (75.92%) of these patients received an analgesic medication in a median time of 45 minutes (interquartile range, 70 minutes). A model containing nine explanatory variables associated with time to first analgesic medication was identified. These nine variables (employment status, discharge location, triage score, Charlson score, arrival pain score, socio-economic status, first location, daily total treatment time and patient time to be seen) represent all of the domains of the Symptom Management Theory.

CONCLUSIONS

Person, environment, health and illness factors are associated with the time taken to deliver analgesic medication to those in pain in the emergency department. This study demonstrates the complexity of factors associated with pain care and the applicability of Symptom Management Theory to pain care in the emergency department.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Identifying a model of factors that are associated with the time in which the most common symptom presenting to the emergency department is treated allows for targeted interventions to groups likely to receive poor care and a framework for its evaluation.

Patient satisfaction with pain relief following major abdominal surgery is influenced by good communication, pain relief and empathic caring: a qualitative interview study

Background

Monitoring and improving the quality of care is an ever increasing concern for health care organisations. Measuring the effectiveness of clinical outcomes is done by looking at specific markers of high quality care. Pain management is considered one of the markers of high quality care and satisfaction with pain management is a crucial and important quality assurance marker; yet, we know little about what contributes to a patient's decision about satisfaction.

Methods

A qualitative study drawing on phenomenological approach aiming to evaluate the perspective of patients experiencing post-operative pain. Patients undergoing major abdominal surgery were recruited from a Renal Transplant and Urology ward in the North of England, UK. Data were collected using in-depth semi-structured interviews and were analysed using Colaizzi's approach.

Results

Ten patients participated in the study and three themes emerged from the analysis. The findings of this study revealed that in order to achieve satisfaction with the management of pain, patient care has to include information delivery which is timely and adequate according to a patient's individual needs, nurses should have a caring attitude and pain should be well controlled.

Conclusion

Satisfaction with pain management is influenced by good communication and information transfer, appropriate pain management and an empathic presence throughout.

Evolving the management of acute perioperative pain towards opioid free protocols: a narrative review

Objective: Identification of pain as the fifth vital sign has resulted in over-prescription and overuse of opioids in the US, with addiction reaching epidemic proportions. In Europe, and more recently in the US, a shift has occurred with the global adoption of multimodal analgesia (MMA), which seeks to minimize perioperative opioid use. Improved functional outcomes and reduced healthcare utilization costs have been demonstrated with MMA, but wide scale use of opioids in pain management protocols continues. As a next step in the pain management evolution, opioid-free analgesia (OFA) MMA strategies have emerged as feasible in many surgical settings.Methods: Articles were limited to clinical studies and meta-analyses focusing on comparisons between opioid-intensive and opioid-free/opioid-sparing strategies published in English.Results: In this review, elimination or substantial reduction in opioid use with OFA strategies for perioperative acute pain are discussed, with an emphasis on improved pain control and patient satisfaction. Improved functional outcomes and patient recovery, as well as reduced healthcare utilization costs, are also discussed, along with challenges facing the implementation of such strategies.Conclusions: Effective MMA strategies have paved the way for OFA approaches to postoperative pain management, with goals to reduce opioid prescriptions, improve patient recovery, and reduce overall healthcare resource utilization and costs. However, institution-wide deployment and adoption of OFA is still in early stages and will require personalization and better management of patient expectations.

Refusal of emergency medical care: An analysis of patients who left without being seen, eloped, and left against medical advice

OBJECTIVE

Emergency department (ED) patients may elect to refuse any aspect of medical care. They may leave prior to physician evaluation, elope during treatment, or leave against medical advice during treatment. This study was undertaken to identify patient perspectives and reasons for refusal of care.

METHODS

This prospective study was conducted at an urban Level 1 Trauma Center. This study examined ED patients who left without being seen (LWBS), eloped during treatment, or left against medical advice during September to December 2018. This project included both chart review and a prospective patient survey.

RESULTS

Among 298 participants, the majority were female (54%). Most participants were White (61%) or African American (36%). Thirty-eight percent of participants left against medical advice, 23% eloped, and 39% left without being seen by a provider. When compared to the general ED population, patients who refused care were significantly younger (p < 0.001). When comparing by groups, patients who left AMA were significantly older than those who eloped or left without being seen (p < 0.001). Among 68 patients interviewed by telephone, the most common stated reasons for refusal of care included wait time (23%), unmet expectations (23%), and negative interactions with ED staff (15%).

CONCLUSION

ED patients who refused care were significantly younger than the general ED population. Common reasons cited by patients for refusal of care included wait time, unmet expectations, and negative interactions with ED staff.

Analgesic Effect of Nitrous Oxide/Oxygen Mixture for Traumatic Pain in the Emergency Department: A Randomized, Double-Blind Study

BACKGROUND

Acute pain is the most common complaint in Emergency Department (ED) admissions, and options for analgesia are limited. Nitrous oxide/oxygen possesses many properties showing it may be an ideal analgesic in the ED.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and analgesic effect of the fixed nitrous oxide/oxygen mixture for trauma patients in the ED.

METHODS

We enrolled 60 patients in this double-blind, randomized study. The treatment group received conventional pain treatment plus a mixture of 65% nitrous oxide/oxygen. The control group received the conventional pain treatment plus oxygen. Primary outcome was the reduction in pain intensity at 5 and 15 min after the start of intervention. Secondary outcomes include adverse events, physiological parameters, and satisfaction from both patients and health care professionals.

RESULTS

Initial pain scores for the nitrous oxide/oxygen group (6.0 [5.0-8.0]) and the oxygen group (6.75 [5.0-9.0]) were comparable (p = 0.57). The mean numerical rating scale scores at 5 min were 3.4 ± 1.8 and 7.0 ± 1.8 for nitrous oxide/oxygen and oxygen, respectively (p < 0.01). The mean pain intensity at 15 min in the treatment group was 3.0 ± 1.9, compared with 6.3 ± 2.2 in the control group (p < 0.01). Both patients' (8.0 [7.0-9.0] vs. 4.0 [2.0-6.0], p < 0.01) and physicians' (8.5 [8.0-9.0] vs. 4.0 [3.0-6.0], p < 0.01) satisfaction scores in the treatment group were significantly higher than the oxygen group. No serious adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

This study gives supporting evidence for the safety and effectiveness of using self-administered nitrous oxide/oxygen mixture in the ED for moderate-to-severe traumatic pain.

Effect on Morphine Requirement of Early Administration of Oral Acetaminophen vs. Acetaminophen/Tramadol Combination in Acute Pain

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect on opioid requirement of pain treatment starting at triage, and to evaluate satisfaction in emergency department (ED) patients with acute pain.

METHODS

This is a single-blind, randomized, prospective study conducted in the ED. The included patients were randomly assigned to single oral doses of placebo, acetaminophen, or a tramadol/acetaminophen combination. Protocol treatment was given at triage. The primary outcome was the need for rescue morphine during ED stay. The secondary outcome included patient satisfaction, ED length of stay, and percentage of patients discharged from the ED with a VAS score of <30.

RESULTS

We included 1,485 patients: 496 patients in the placebo group, 497 in the acetaminophen group, and 492 in the tramadol/acetaminophen combination group. The groups were similar regarding demographic and clinical characteristics and baseline VAS pain scores. Rescue morphine was significantly decreased in the tramadol/acetaminophen combination group compared to that in the placebo and acetaminophen groups (11.5%, 23.2%, and 18.9%, respectively; P = 0.03). Patient satisfaction was higher in the tramadol/acetaminophen combination group (77% vs. 69% in the acetaminophen group and 68% in the placebo group). A VAS score of <30 was observed in 84% of patients in the placebo group, 83% in the acetaminophen group, and 87% in the tramadol/acetaminophen combination group (P = 0.01 between the acetaminophen group and tramadol/acetaminophen combination group). The ED length of stay was 60 minutes for the acetaminophen group and tramadol/acetaminophen combination group and 71 minutes for the placebo group (P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Oral tramadol/acetaminophen combination administered early in triage was associated with a decrease in intravenous morphine requirement and increase in satisfaction among ED patients with acute pain when compared with patients taking acetaminophen. No significant increase in side effects was found. This intervention may be considered in EDs with an aim of similar benefits.

Délégation de l’évaluation et du traitement de la douleur à l’infirmier de Service mobile d’urgence et de réanimation : étude avant–après monocentrique

Introduction : La prise en charge de la douleur en médecine d’urgence préhospitalière est encore insuffisante. Cette étude a pour objectif d’évaluer les effets d’une délégation de l’évaluation et du traitement de la douleur à l’infirmier diplômé d’État (IDE) en Service mobile d’urgence et de réanimation (Smur) sur le suivi des recommandations de la Société française de médecine d’urgence (SFMU).

Méthode : Étude rétrospective de type avant–après réalisée au Smur du centre hospitalier universitaire (CHU) de Nîmes de janvier à mai 2017. Les IDE ont été formés, entre les deux phases, à un protocole de délégation de l’évaluation et du traitement de la douleur fondé sur les dernières recommandations.

Résultats : Cent quatre-vingt-un patients ont été inclus dans chaque groupe, 74 (40 %) femmes (âge moyen de 60 ± 18 ans). Les groupes étaient comparables à l’exception de la proportion d’interventions traumatologiques (11 % dans le groupe « avant » vs 20 % dans le groupe « après » ; p = 0,02). Les recommandations ont été respectées pour 12 (7 %) patients dans le groupe « avant », 21 (12 %) dans le groupe « après » (p = 0,10). Le seul facteur indépendant de respect des recommandations est le type d’intervention traumatologique (odds ratio = 9,7 ; intervalle de confiance à 95 % : [2,3–53,3] ; p < 0,01). Le nombre de patients ayant bénéficié d’une administration d’antalgique était respectivement de 55 (30 %) dans le groupe « avant » et de 73 (40 %) dans le groupe « après » (p = 0,05). La réévaluation de l’intensité douloureuse en fin de prise en charge a été consignée dans 11 (6 %) cas de la phase avant vs 38 (21 %) dans la phase après (p < 0,01). Dans le sous-groupe des patients n’ayant pas bénéficié de trinitrine, les recommandations ont été respectées respectivement pendant les phases « avant » et « après » chez 7 (6 %) patients vs 17 (14 % ; p = 0,03).

Conclusion : Malgré une augmentation du taux de prescription d’antalgiques et de réévaluation de la douleur, le protocole de délégation IDE n’a pas permis un meilleur respect des recommandations. L’établissement de protocoles spécifiques en fonction du type d’intervention, notamment traumatologique, pourrait être une piste de réflexion.

A fixed nitrous oxide/oxygen mixture as an analgesic for trauma patients in emergency department: study protocol for a randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Acute pain is always the most common complaint in Emergency Department admissions and options for analgesia are limited. Nitrous oxide/oxygen possess many properties showing it may be an ideal analgesic method for the Emergency Department; it is quick-acting, well-tolerated, and does not mask signs and symptoms. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and analgesic effect of the fixed nitrous oxide/oxygen mixture for trauma patients in a busy emergency environment.

METHODS

The randomized, double-blind, prospective, placebo-controlled study will be carried out in the Emergency Department of General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University. The target research objects are trauma patients who present to the Emergency Department and report moderate to severe intensities of acute pain. A total of 90 patients will be recruited and randomly assigned into the treatment and control group. The treatment group will receive conventional pain treatment plus nitrous oxide/oxygen mixture and the control group will receive conventional pain treatment plus oxygen. Neither patients, nor investigators, nor data collectors will know the nature of the gas mixture in each cylinder and the randomization list. Outcomes will be monitored at baseline(T0), 5 min (T1), and 15 min (T2) after the beginning of intervention and at 5 min post intervention (T3) for each group. The primary outcome is the level of pain relief after the initial administering of the intervention at T1, T2, and T3. Secondary outcomes include adverse events, physiological parameters, total time of the gas administration, satisfaction from both patients and healthcare professionals, and the acceptance of patients.

DISCUSSION

Our previous studies suggested that a fixed nitrous oxide/oxygen mixture was an efficacious analgesic for the management of burning dressing pain and breakthrough cancer pain. The results of this study will provide a more in-depth understanding of the effect of this gas. If this treatment proves successful, it could help to generate preliminary guidelines and be implemented widely in trauma patients with pain in Emergency Departments.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Register, ChiCTR-INR-16007807 . Registered on 21 January 2016.

Prospective study on prevalence, intensity, type, and therapy of acute pain in a second-level urban emergency department

Aim

Pain represents the most frequent cause for patient admission to emergency departments (EDs). Oligoanalgesia is a common problem in this field. The aims of this study were to assess prevalence and intensity of pain in patients who visited a second-level urban ED and to evaluate the efficacy of pharmacological treatment administered subsequent to variations in pain intensity.

Methods

A 4-week prospective observational study was carried out on 2,838 patients who visited a second-level urban ED. Pain intensity was evaluated using the Numeric Rating Scale at the moment of triage. The efficacy of prescribed analgesic therapy was evaluated at 30 and 60 minutes, and at discharge. Data concerning pain intensity were classified as absent, slight, mild, or severe. Pain was evaluated in relation to the prescribed therapy.

Results

Pain prevalence was 70.7%. Traumatic events were the primary cause in most cases (40.44%), followed by pain linked to urologic problems (13.52%), abdominal pain (13.39%), and nontraumatic musculoskeletal pain (7.10%). Only 32.46% of patients were given pharmacological therapy. Of these, 76% reported severe pain, 19% moderate, and 5% slight, and 66% received nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or paracetamol, 4% opioids, and 30% other therapies. A difference of at least 2 points on the Numerical Rating Scale was observed in 84% of patients on reevaluation following initial analgesic therapy.

Conclusion

Pain represents one of the primary reasons for visits to EDs. Although a notable reduction in pain intensity has been highlighted in patients who received painkillers, results show that inadequate treatment of pain in ED continues to be a problem.

Improvement in physician pain perception with using pain scales

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Acute pain is the most common reason for visits to the emergency department (ED). The underuse of analgesics occurs in a large proportion of ED patients. The physician's accurate assessment of patients' pain is a key element to improved pain management. The purpose of this study was to assess if physicians' perception of pain can improve with looking at the pain score of the patient marked on VAS.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a single-center, cross-sectional prospective observational study, that took place in an academic ED.

METHODS

All adult ED patients presenting with a painful condition were enrolled to the study. In the first phase of the study, the physician rated his/her opinion about the patient's pain on a 100 mm VAS, in a blinded fashion to the patient's pain score. In the second phase, the physician rated his/her opinion after looking at the pain scale marked by patient.

RESULTS

587 patients (295, in first and 292, in second phase) were enrolled. The groups were not statistically different for demographic data. The physician's perception of pain was lower than the patient's pain score at both phases of the study. Insight of the patient's pain score on VAS increased the physician's pain perception significantly (p = 0.03). During the second phase, physicians ordered significantly more analgesic medications to the patients (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

The physicians' perception of the patients' pain differs significantly from the pain that the patient is experiencing. VAS helps to bring the physicians impression of pain perception to the level of pain that the patient is actually experiencing and resulted in ordering more analgesics to the patients. Implementation of a pain assessment tool can raise the physician's perception of the pain and may improve pain management practices and patient satisfaction.

Evaluation of the effectiveness and efficiency of the triage emergency department nursing protocol for the management of pain

Introduction

Pain is a common symptom presented in the emergency department (ED) although it is often underestimated, poorly evaluated and treated. The application of a protocol for timely pain management ensured by the nurse can avoid the delays in the analgesic treatment and improve the patient’s quality of waiting.

Aims

To check the effectiveness and efficiency of the protocol aimed at early pain management in triage, active in our ED. In particular, the response to analgesic treatment was evaluated 60 minutes after the administration and at discharge. Patient satisfaction was also evaluated using two anonymous questionnaires both at discharge and 48 hours later via telephone.

Methods

A single-center, observational study was conducted on a prospective cohort of patients (aged ≥4 years) with a pain symptom at admission in ED with no surgical picture.

Results

In the observation period (June 2015–May 2016), 382 patients were enrolled, and of these, 312 (84.8%) accepted pain therapy during triage stage in the ED. In 97.4% of the cases, orosoluble paracetamol 1000 mg was administered. In the re-evaluation done 60 minutes later, 65.9% of the patients showed a reduction of at least 2 points on Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), equal to a mean reduction of 2.24 points (95% CI: 2.03–2.45). The mean time of analgesia intake was equal to 5.9 minutes (95% CI: 3.8–8.1). In the re-evaluation done at discharge, 33.2% of the patients showed a reduction of NRS score >50%, leading to a mean reduction of 39% (95% CI: 35.3%−41.9%). The level of patient satisfaction was high with a mean value >9 points (maximum satisfaction =10).

Conclusion

This protocol shows that optimal pain management was achieved by patients rapidly receiving an effective painkiller therapy at triage, leading to substantial patient satisfaction. In moderate pain, orosoluble paracetamol 1000 mg provided a reduction of NRS score by 2 points in 67.6% of the patients, confirming to be the analgesic of choice in ED.

Pain management of trauma patients in the emergency department: a study in a public hospital in Iran

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common problem which the patients in emergency departments (ED) face, especially trauma patients under treatment may suffer from physical, psychological and ethical issues. The purpose of this study was to evaluate traumatic pain management in the emergency department at a public hospital in Iran in 2014.

METHODS

This observational prospective study was conducted on 450 trauma patients admitted to a trauma emergency department. The tool used in this study has three parts: demographic data, data of trauma, and VRS (Verbal Rating Scales) score at a 7-point scale-at the arrival time to 4h later. The statistical analysis was conducted by using Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests, repeated measures, survival analysis, and multiple regression analysis.

RESULTS

The majority of the samples were male (83.3%) with the mean age of 35.2years. The patients mostly suffered from contusions and strains (42.4%). The majority of the patients [274 patients (60.8%)] received no intervention for pain relief and only 60 patients (13.3%) received analgesics. The mean time period of the first analgesic utilization was 41 (±20.4) minutes. Pain in admission, pain assessment, and receiving intervention could explain the 32% of pain reduction. No other variables such as age, sex, education, kind of trauma, and the shift of admission were involved in pain reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

This research study demonstrated that comprehensive, adequate pain management remains an obscure goal within the emergency nursing setting. There is a need to undertake further research and develop educational programs on effective analgesic practice in pain management.

Variables associated with administration of analgesia, nurse-initiated analgesia and early analgesia in the emergency department

OBJECTIVE

To determine the patient and clinical variables associated with administration of any analgesia, nurse-initiated analgesia (NIA, prescribed and administered by a nurse) and early analgesia (within 30 min of presentation).

METHODS

We undertook a retrospective cohort study of patients who presented to a metropolitan ED in Melbourne, Australia, during July and August, 2013. The ED has an established NIA programme. Patients were included if they were aged 18 years or more and presented with a painful complaint. The study sample was randomly selected from a list of all eligible patients. Data were extracted electronically from the ED records and by explicit extraction from the medical record. Logistic regression models were constructed to assess associations with the three binary study end points.

RESULTS

1289 patients were enrolled. Patients were less likely to receive any analgesia if they presented 08:00-15:59 hours (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.98) or 16:00-24:00 hours (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.80) were triage category 5 (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.49) or required an interpreter (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.86). Patients were less likely to receive NIA or early analgesia if they were aged 56 years or more (OR 0.70 and 0.63; OR 0.57 and 0.21, respectively) or if they had received ambulance analgesia (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.95; OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.74, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who present during the daytime, have a triage category of 5 or require an interpreter are less likely to receive analgesia. Older patients and those who received ambulance analgesia are less likely to receive NIA or early analgesia.

ED triage pain protocol reduces time to receiving analgesics in patients with painful conditions

BACKGROUND

Studies suggest that collaborative nursing protocols initiated in triage improve emergency department (ED) throughput and decrease time to treatment.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study is to determine if an ED triage pain protocol improves time to provision of analgesics.

METHODS

Retrospective data abstracted via electronic medical record of patients at a safety net facility with 67 000 annual adult visits. Patients older than 18 years who presented to the ED between March 1, 2011, and May 31, 2013, with 1 of 6 conditions were included: back pain, dental pain, extremity trauma, sore throat, ear pain, or pain from an abscess. A 3-month orientation to an ED nurse-initiated pain protocol began on March 1, 2012. Nurses administered oral analgesics per protocol, beginning with acetaminophen or ibuprofen and progressing to oxycodone. Preimplementation and postimplementation analyses examined differences in time to analgesics. Multivariable analysis modeled time to analgesics as a function of patient factors.

RESULTS

Over a 27-month period, 23 409 patients were included: 13 112 received pain medications and 10 297 did not. A total of 12 240 (52%) were male, 12 578 (54%) were African American, and 7953 (34%) were white, with a mean (SD) age of 39 years (13 years). The pain protocol was used in 1002 patients. There was a significant change in mean time (minutes) to provision of analgesics between preimplementation (238) and postimplementation (168) (P < .0001). Linear regression showed the protocol-delivered medications to younger patients and of lower acuity in a reduced time. Variables not related to time to provision of medication included sex, payer, and race.

CONCLUSION

Emergency department triage pain protocol decreased time to provision of pain medications and did so without respect to payer category, sex, or race.

Impact of a pilot team on patients' pain reduction and satisfaction in an emergency department: A before-and-after observational study

BACKGROUND

Pain management and patient satisfaction were targeted in the emergency department of a Paris university hospital. In 1999, 77.0% of patients complained of pain on arrival and more than half of patients did not experience pain relief at discharge. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the outcomes of the implementation of a team piloting pain management on pain reduction and pain care satisfaction.

METHOD

Two cross-sectional surveys (04/10/1999 to 19/10/1999 and 03/04/2007 to 18/04/2007) were conducted before and after a team piloting pain management was deployed in the emergency department. Consecutive patients age 18 years and older who visited the department suffering from pain were given structured questionnaires that validated scales scoring pain upon arrival and at discharge. Patients' files were analyzed using structured forms. The parameters associated with pain reduction and patient satisfaction were sought.

RESULTS

In 2007, 65.0% of patients had their pain relieved vs. 35.1% in 1999 (P<0.001); 60.2% were satisfied with the pain care received vs. 39.8%. Pain management (e.g. waiting time ≤ 20 min: 47.6% vs. 20.8%; interventions on pain before the physician's examination: 63.0% vs. 13.8%; and pain reassessment after intervention: 13.8% vs. 4.5%) improved. Both pain reduction and patient satisfaction were significantly associated with intervention before the physician's examination. Pain reduction was independently and positively associated with time of survey, triage level (depending on the severity of their condition), pain intensity on arrival, and negatively associated with discharge without hospitalization. Satisfaction was independently and positively associated with waiting time before examination (0-20 min) and the absence of procedural pain.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of a team piloting pain management seemed to have had positive effects on pain management in the emergency department. However, respectively, 56.2% and 39.8% of patients remained without pain relief and dissatisfied with pain management at the end of their visit.

Assessment of pain in a Norwegian Emergency Department

Background

Although pain management is a fundamental aspect of care in emergency departments (EDs), inadequate treatment of pain is unfortunately common. There are multiple local protocols for pain assessment in the ED. This study evaluated whether the initial assessment and treatment of pain in the ED are in accordance with the in-hospital protocol of the ED at a Norwegian University Hospital.

Materials and methods

Prospective data on pain assessment and initial treatment in the ED were collected from nursing and physician documentation. The patients’ perceptions of subjective pain were recorded using a numerical rating scale (NRS) that ranged from 0 to 10.

Results

Seventy-seven percent of the 764 enrolled patients were evaluated for pain at arrival. Female patients had a higher probability of not being asked about pain, but there was no difference in the percentage of patients asked about pain with respect to age. Additionally, patients with low oxygen saturation and systolic blood pressure were less likely to be asked about pain. Of those with moderate and severe pain (58 %), only 14 % received pain relief.

Discussion

Assessment and treatment of pain in the ED are inadequate and not in line with the local protocols. A focus on strategies to improve pain treatment in the ED is a necessary aspect of developing optimal acute patient care in Norway in the future.

Prehospital personnel’s attitudes to pain management

Objectives

Pain is one of the most common reasons for patients to seek acute medical care. The management of pain is often inadequate both in the prehospital setting and in the emergency department. Our aim was to evaluate the attitudes towards pain management among prehospital personnel in two Scandinavian metropolitan areas.

Methods

A questionnaire with 36 items was distributed to prehospital personnel working in Helsinki, Finland (n=70) and to prehospital personnel working in Stockholm, Sweden (n=634). Each item was weighted on a five-level Likert scale. Factor loading of the questionnaire was made using maximum likelihood analysis and varimax rotation. Six scales were constructed (Hesitation, Encouragement, Side effects, Evaluation, Perceptions, Pain metre). A Student’s t-test, ANOVA, and Pearson Correlation were used for analysis of significance.

Results

: The response rate among the Finnish prehospital personnel was 66/70 (94.2%) while among the Swedish personnel it was 127/634 (20.0%). The prehospital personnel from Sweden showed significantly more Hesitation to administer pain relief compared to the Finnish personnel (mean 2.01 SD 0.539 vs. 1.67 SD 0.530, p < 0.001). Those who had received pain education at their workplace showed significantly less Hesitation than those who had not participated in education. There was a significant negative correlation (p < 0.01) between Hesitation and Side effects. There was also astatistically significant(p < 0.01) correlation between Perceptions and Hesitation, indicating that a stoic attitude towards pain was associated with indifference to possible Side effects of pain medication (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The results show that there was a significant correlation between the extent of education and the prehospital personnel’s attitudes to pain management. Gender and age among the prehospital personnel also affected the attitudes to pain management. The main discrepancy between the Swedish and Finnish personnel was that the participants from Stockholm showed statistically significantly more hesitation about administering pain medication compared to the participants from Helsinki.

Implications

The results of the study highlight the need for continuous medical education (CME) for prehospital personnel. CME and discussions among prehospital personnel may help to make a change in the personnel’s attitudes towards pain and pain management in the prehospital context.

Nonpharmacological interventions for pain management in paramedicine and the emergency setting: a review of the literature

Paramedicine and the emergency medical services have been moving in the direction of advancing pharmaceutical intervention for the management of pain in both acute and chronic situations. This coincides with other areas of advanced life support and patient management strategies that have been well researched and continue to benefit from the increasing evidence. Even though paramedic practice is firmly focused on pharmacological interventions to alleviate pain, there is emerging evidence proposing a range of nonpharmacological options that can have an important role in pain management. This review highlights literature that suggests that paramedicine and emergency medical services should be considering the application of complementary and alternative therapies which can enhance current practice and reduce the use of pharmacological interventions.

Mandatory pain scoring at triage reduces time to analgesia

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We study whether mandatory triage pain scoring and an educational program reduces the time to initial analgesic treatment.

METHODS

We performed a prospective interventional study in the emergency department (ED) of an adult tertiary referral hospital and major trauma center. After an observational assessment of baseline time to analgesic administration, we mandated the recording of triage pain scores through our computerized information system. In a second separate phase, we administered a staff educational package on the importance of timely analgesia. We measured time to initial analgesia after each phase and at 12-month follow-up.

RESULTS

We studied 35,628 patients (8,743 baseline, 8,462 after mandating pain scoring, 9,043 after the educational program, and 9,380 at follow-up), with 12,925 patients (36.3%) overall receiving analgesics. At baseline, the median time to analgesia was 123 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] 58 to 231 minutes), which reduced with pain scoring (95 minutes; IQR 45 to 194 minutes) but no further with the educational package (98 minutes; IQR 45 to 191 minutes). At 12-month follow-up, the median time to analgesia was 78 minutes (IQR 45 to 143 minutes), 45 minutes (36.4%) faster than at baseline.

CONCLUSION

The simple act of altering our ED computerized information system to require pain scoring at triage led to substantially faster provision of initial analgesia, with the effect sustained at 12 months.

Emergency department crowding and decreased quality of pain care

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to evaluate the association of emergency department (ED) crowding factors with the quality of pain care.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study of all adult patients (> or =18 years) with conditions warranting pain care seen at an academic, urban, tertiary care ED from July 1 to July 31, 2005, and December 1 to December 31, 2005. Patients were included if they presented with a chief complaint of pain and a final ED diagnosis of a painful condition. Predictor ED crowding variables studied were 1) census, 2) number of admitted patients waiting for inpatient beds (boarders), and 3) number of boarders divided by ED census (boarding burden). The outcomes of interest were process of pain care measures: documentation of clinician pain assessment, medications ordered, and times of activities (e.g., arrival, assessment, ordering of medications).

RESULTS

A total of 1,068 patient visits were reviewed. Fewer patients received analgesic medication during periods of high census (>50th percentile; parameter estimate = -0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.80 to -0.07). There was a direct correlation with total ED census and increased time to pain assessment (Spearman r = 0.33, p < 0.0001), time to analgesic medication ordering (r = 0.22, p < 0.0001), and time to analgesic medication administration (r = 0.25, p < 0.0001). There were significant delays (>1 hour) for pain assessment and the ordering and administration of analgesic medication during periods of high ED census and number of boarders, but not with boarding burden.

CONCLUSIONS

ED crowding as measured by patient volume negatively impacts patient care. Greater numbers of patients in the ED, whether as total census or number of boarders, were associated with worse pain care.

Oxycodone versus codeine for triage pain in children with suspected forearm fracture: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of pain reduction of triage oxycodone (O) versus codeine (C) to children with suspected forearm fractures.

DESIGN/METHODS

Children, aged 4 to 17 years, were randomized to receive O (0.2 mg/kg; maximum, 15 mg) or C (2 mg/kg; maximum, 120 mg) if isolated forearm fracture was suspected by the emergency department (ED) triage nurse. All other ED staff were blinded to the assignment. The primary outcome measure was a 5-point facial scale (0 = no pain, 4 = severe) completed by subjects to assess pain at baseline then at 30-minute intervals until ED discharge or procedural sedation for fractures requiring reduction. Ten adverse effects were assessed at baseline and the succeeding intervals. Identification of the most painful part of the visit was assessed at discharge. Efficacy and adverse effects of O versus C were compared using generalized estimate equation modeling.

RESULTS

One hundred seven subjects (mean age, 10.4 years; African American, 55%; males, 56%) were randomized to O (n = 51) or C (n= 56). Subjects taking O reported a pain score significantly lower than subjects taking C (0.4 faces, P = 0.01). Minor adverse effects occurred in both groups, but itching occurred less in O subjects (odds ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.99). The most painful part of the visit was radiography (O = 41%, C = 38%) followed by extremity examination (O = 16%, C = 13%) then casting (O = 8%, C = 13%).

CONCLUSIONS

Triage-administered O tended toward greater pain reduction compared with C in children with suspected forearm fractures. Although minor adverse effects occurred in both groups, itching occurred more in C. Identification of radiography as the most painful part of fracture evaluation underscores the need for early triage administration of analgesia for suspected fractures.

Triage pain scores and the desire for and use of analgesics

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Inadequate analgesia (oligoanalgesia) is a common phenomenon. In an effort to improve pain recognition and management, pain scores are mandated by The Joint Commission. When patients with pain do not receive analgesics, treatment is considered deficient. However, the mere presence of pain does not imply that all patients desire analgesics. We determine how often patients in pain desire and receive analgesics in the emergency department (ED). We hypothesize that many ED patients in pain do not desire analgesics and that most who want them receive them.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective observational study of pain-related visits to an academic ED during the spring of 2007. Standardized collection of demographic and clinical data was performed, and patients rated their pain severity on a 0 to 10 numeric rating scale. The main outcome measures were the desire for and administration of analgesics during the ED visit. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with patient desire for and administration of analgesics.

RESULTS

We enrolled 392 patients. Mean (SD) age was 39 years (19), 50% were female patients, 76% were white. Mean (SD) initial pain score was 7.1 (2). Of the 392 patients, 199 (51% [95% confidence interval (CI) 46% to 56%]) desired analgesics and 227 (58% [95% CI 53% to 63%]) received analgesics within 92 (SD 106) minutes. Of patients desiring analgesics, 162 (81% [95% CI 75% to 86%]) received them. Reasons for not wanting analgesics included pain tolerable (47%), analgesic taken at home (11%), and wanting to remain alert (7%). Pain scores were higher in those patients who wanted analgesics than in those patients who did not want analgesics (7.8 [95% CI 7.5 to 8.1] versus 6.4 [95% CI 6.1 to 6.7]; difference 1.4 [95% CI 0.9 to 1.8]). In multivariate analysis, pain scores (odds ratio [OR] 1.3 for every 1-point increase in pain score) and constant pain (OR 2.0) were significant factors that predicted wanting analgesics, whereas pain scores (OR 1.2) and desiring analgesics (OR 7.4) were significant predictors of receiving analgesics.

CONCLUSION

Nearly half of all ED patients in pain do not desire analgesics and most who desire analgesics receive them. Although the average pain score for patients not wanting analgesics was lower, it was often in the moderate to severe range. Patients should be asked whether they have pain and whether they want analgesics regardless of their pain scores.

Oligoanalgesia in the emergency department: short-term beneficial effects of an education program on acute pain

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Acute pain is the most frequent complaint in emergency department (ED) admissions, but its management is often neglected, placing patients at risk of oligoanalgesia. We evaluate the effect of the implementation of guidelines for pain management in ED patients with pain at admission or anytime during their stay in our ED.

METHODS

This prospective pre-post intervention cohort study included data collection both before and after guideline implementation. Consecutive adult patients admitted with acute pain from any cause or with pain at any time after admission were enrolled. The quality of pain management was evaluated according to information in the ED medical records by using a standardized collection form, and its impact on patients was recorded with a questionnaire at discharge.

RESULTS

Two hundred forty-nine and 192 patients were included during pre- and postintervention periods. Pain was documented in 61% and 76% of nurse and physician notes, respectively, versus 78% and 85% after the intervention (difference 17%/9%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 8% to 26%/2% to 17%, respectively). Administration of analgesia increased from 40% to 63% (difference 23%; 95% CI 13% to 32%) and of morphine from 10% to 27% (difference 17%; 95% CI 10% to 24%). Mean doses of intravenous morphine increased from 2.4 mg (95% CI 1.9 to 2.9 mg) to 4.6 mg (95% CI 3.9 to 5.3 mg); administration of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and acetaminophen increased as well. There was a greater reduction of visual analogue scale score after intervention: 2.1 cm (95% CI 1.7 to 2.4 cm) versus 2.9 cm (95% CI 2.5 to 3.3 cm), which was associated with improved patient satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Education program and guidelines implementation for pain management lead to improved pain management, analgesia, and patient satisfaction in the ED.

Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial of Two Intravenous Morphine Dosages (0.10 mg/kg and 0.15 mg/kg) in Emergency Department Patients With Moderate to Severe Acute Pain

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We compare pain relief and safety of morphine 0.10 mg/kg with 0.15 mg/kg in adult emergency department (ED) patients with acute pain.

METHODS

This was a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of intravenous morphine 0.10 mg/kg versus 0.15 mg/kg, (delivered in 2 divided doses) in adult ED patients with acute pain requiring opioid analgesia. Assessment was made at baseline, 30 minutes, and 60 minutes with a validated verbal numeric rating scale. Pain reduction and satisfaction scores were measured at 30 and 60 minutes. The primary outcome measure was the between-group difference in mean before-after change in numeric rating scale from baseline to 60 minutes.

RESULTS

Two hundred eighty patients were enrolled. Between-group difference in numeric rating scale improvement from baseline to 60 minutes was 0.8 (95% confidence interval 0.1 to 1.5), favoring the 0.15 mg/kg group. Pain relief scores and adverse events were similar in the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Although 0.15 mg/kg of morphine is safe and provides statistically superior analgesia compared with a dose of morphine at 0.10 mg/kg, this difference in pain reduction did not reach the threshold of greater than 1.3 numeric rating scale units required to declare the higher dose of morphine clinically superior.