Relationship between behavioral and physiological indicators of pain, critical care patients' self-reports of pain, and opioid administration

Individualised analgesia, sedation, delirium and comfort management strategies in the ICU: a narrative review

This group is a product of the collaboration agreement signed by SOMIAMA (Sociedad de Medicina Intensiva de Madrid) and SAR MADRID (Sociedad de Anestesiología, Reanimación y Terapéutica del Dolor de Madrid) under which the organisations agreed to create joint working groups to improve critical patient care. Pain, discomfort, agitation, and delirium cause suffering, delay discharge, and can lead to serious complications in patients admitted to medical and surgical critical care units and post-anaesthesia care units. The main objectives in this type of unit include: Ensuring the comfort of patients suffering or recovering from a critical illness.Avoiding complications associated with the measures, particularly pharmacological, taken to ensure that comfort.

Multimodal treatment, including extracorporeal shock wave therapy, for refractory chronic tension-type headache: a case report

BACKGROUND

Few reports have described multidisciplinary treatment, including extracorporeal shock wave therapy, for patients with refractory chronic tension-type headache. In this study, we conducted multidisciplinary treatment for a patient with chronic tension-type headache who suffered from chronic headache refractory to treatment.

CASE PRESENTATION

The patient was a 45-year-old Japanese male suffering from 20 years of headache. As his headache had worsened recently, he visited a local clinic. With the diagnosis of suspected tension-type headache, its treatment was unsuccessful and he was referred to our hospital. The neurology department confirmed the tension-type headache and prescribed another medication, but he showed no improvement. Then, the patient was referred to the rehabilitation medicine department for consultation. At the initial visit, we identified multiple myofascial trigger points in his bilateral posterior neck and upper back regions. At the initial visit, he was prescribed 10 mL of 1% lidocaine injected into the muscles in these areas. In addition, he received 2000 extracorporeal shock wave therapy into bilateral trapezius muscles, and was instructed to take oral Kakkonto extract granules, benfotiamine, pyridoxine hydrochloride, and cyanocobalamin. Cervical muscle and shoulder girdle stretches and exercises were also recommended. At follow-up treatment visits, we used extracorporeal shock wave therapy to bilateral trapezius muscles, which led to immediate pain relief. After 11 weeks, he was not taking any medication and his headache was subjectively improved and his medical treatment ended.

CONCLUSION

A patient with chronic tension-type headache refractory to regular treatment was successfully treated with a multimodal approach including extracorporeal shock wave therapy in addition to standard treatment. For patients with tension-type headache accompanied by myofascial trigger points, it may be recommended to promptly consider aggressive multimodal treatment that includes extracorporeal shock wave therapy.

Easing Suffering for ICU Patients and Their Families: Evidence and Opportunities for Primary and Specialty Palliative Care in the ICU

Intensive care unit (ICU) admissions are often accompanied by many physical and existential pressure points that can be extraordinarily wearing on patients and their families and surrogate decision makers (SDMs). Multidisciplinary palliative support, including physicians, advanced practice nurses, nutritionists, chaplains and other team members, may alleviate many of these sources of potential suffering. However, the palliative needs of ICU patients undoubtedly exceed the bandwidth of current consultative specialty palliative medicine teams. Informed by standard-of-care palliative medicine domains, we review common ICU symptoms (pain, dyspnea and thirst) and their prevalence, sources and their treatment. We then identify palliative needs and impacts in the domains of communication, SDM support and transitions of care for patients and their families through their journey in the ICU, from discharge and recovery at home to chronic critical illness, post-ICU disability or death. Finally, we examine the evidence for strategies to incorporate specialty palliative medicine and palliative principles into ICU care for the improvement of patient- and family-centered care. While randomized controlled studies have failed to demonstrate measurable improvement in pre-determined outcomes for patient- and family-relevant outcomes, embracing the principles of palliative medicine and assuring their delivery in the ICU is likely to translate to overall improvement in humanistic, person-centered care that supports patients and their SDMs during and following critical illness.

Nurses Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices Toward Pain Assessment and Management of Patients Unable to Communicate Verbally

Critically ill patients usually experience a significant level of pain during rest or during routine care such as turning, wound care, and endotracheal suctioning. Pain assessment is the cornerstone of pain management. Adequate pain assessment and management are major responsibilities of critical care nurses. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the nurses' knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward pain assessment and management of the intensive care unit (ICU) patients who are unable to communicate verbally. A descriptive cross-sectional design was used in this study. The study was conducted at ICUs in 5 hospitals from the north, middle, and south areas of Jordan. A self-administered questionnaire developed by Rose was used in this study. The most important finding in this study was that a large number of ICU nurses do not use assessment tools to evaluate the level of pain in patients who are unable to communicate verbally. Moreover, the nurses have inadequate knowledge about pain assessment and management. As perceived by the nurses, "restlessness" was the highest rated routine indicator of pain (25.1%), followed by "not following commands" (24%). Half of the participants (50%) answered that nurses were the persons who provide the most accurate rating of pain intensity. However, the participants showed positive attitude toward pain assessment and management.

Pain assessment of the adult sedated and ventilated patients in the intensive care setting: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Pain is frequently encountered in the intensive care setting. Given the impact of pain assessment on patient outcomes and length of hospital stay, studies have been conducted to validate tools, establish guidelines and cast light on practices relating to pain assessment.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the extent, range and nature of the evidence around pain assessment practices in adult patients who cannot self-report pain in the intensive care setting and summarise the findings from a heterogenous body of evidence to aid in the planning and the conduct of future research and management of patient care. The specific patient cohort studied was the sedated/ ventilated patient within the intensive care setting.

DESIGN

A scoping review protocol utilised the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping review checklist (PRISMA-ScR).

METHODS

The review comprised of five phases: identifying the research question, identifying relevant studies, study selection, charting the data and collating, summarizing, and reporting the results. Databases were systematically searched from January to April 2020. Databases included were Scopus, Web of Science, Medline via Ovid, CINAHL COMPLETE via EBSCO host, Health Source and PUBMED. Limits were applied on dates (2000 to current), language (English), subject (human) and age (adult). Key words used were "pain", "assessment", "measurement", "tools", "instruments", "practices", "sedated", "ventilated", "adult". A hand search technique was used to search citations within articles. Database alerts were set to apprise the availability of research articles pertaining to pain assessment practices in the intensive care setting.

RESULTS

The review uncovered literature categorised under five general themes: behaviour pain assessment tools, pain assessment guidelines, position statements and quality improvement projects, enablers and barriers to pain assessment, and evidence appertaining to actual practices. Behaviour pain assessment tools are the benchmark for pain assessment of sedated and ventilated patients. The reliability and validity of physiologic parameters to assess pain is yet to be determined. Issues of compliance with pain assessment guidelines and tools exist and impact on practices. In some countries like Australia, there is a dearth of information regarding the prevalence and characteristics of patients receiving analgesia, type of analgesia used, pain assessment practices and the process of recording pain management. In general, pain assessment varies across different intensive care settings and lacks consistency.

CONCLUSION

Research on pain assessment practices requires further investigation to explore the causative mechanisms that contribute to poor compliance with established pain management guidelines. The protocol of this review was registered with Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/25a6) Tweetable abstract: Pain assessment in intensive care settings lacks consistency. New information is needed to understand the causative mechanisms underpinning poor compliance with guidelines.

Current Perspectives on the Assessment and Management of Pain in the Intensive Care Unit

Critical illness is often painful, both from the underlying source of illness, as well as necessary procedures performed for the monitoring and care of these patients. Pain is often under-recognized in the critically ill, especially among those who cannot self-report, so accurate assessment and management continue to be major consideration in their care. Pain management in the intensive care unit (ICU) is an evolving practice, with a focus on accurate and frequent pain assessment, and targeted pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatment methods to maximize analgesia and minimize sedation. In this review, we will evaluate several validated methods of pain assessment in the ICU and present management options. We will review the evidence-based recommendations put forth by the largest critical care societies and several high-quality studies related to both the in-hospital approach to pain, as well as the short- and long-term consequences of untreated pain in ICU patients. We conclude with future directions.

Verification of the critical-care pain observation tool in conscious patients with hemiparesis or cognitive dysfunction

PURPOSE

Altered cognition or hemiparesis can occur in neurocritical but conscious patients, and recognizing pain is challenging. This study aimed to test the reliability and validity of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) in this specific group.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective study included ventilated, conscious patients who had certain neurologic deficits. CPOT scores were assessed before and after nociceptive (turning the patient) and non-nociceptive (measuring body temperature) procedures. The patients' self-reported pain was also recorded using a numerical rating scale (NRS).

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients were enrolled. The intraclass correlation coefficient was r = 0.975-1.000 (p < 0.001) for turning the patient. Discriminant validation indicated that CPOT scores were significantly higher after turning the patient compared with measuring body temperature (p = 0.025). CPOT scores were positively correlated with NRS when turning the patient (r = 0.724, p < 0.001). After turning, the mean increase in CPOT score was lower in the patients with hemiparesis than in those without hemiparesis (p = 0.079), however it was significantly higher in the patients with cognitive dysfunction compared to those without cognitive dysfunction (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

The CPOT is an appropriate instrument to assess pain in conscious patients, particularly those with cognitive dysfunction. The influence of hemiparesis on the CPOT is noteworthy.

Health Care Professionals' Assessment of Patient Discomfort After Abdominal Surgery

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to classify elements of patients' discomfort in the resuscitation room after open or laparoscopic abdominal surgery as per health care professionals' perceptions.

DESIGN

A prospective cross-sectional study at a tertiary hospital in Spain.

METHODS

Resuscitation room nurses administered the Postoperative Discomfort Inventory to physicians and nurses with >1 year experience working closely with patients who had undergone abdominal surgery, asking them to score nine items related to patients' discomfort in the first 8 hours after surgery on an 11-point scale (0 = absent to 10 = very severe). Interobserver agreement among proxy reporters was measured with the Spearman's ρ; correlations >0.35 was considered adequate agreement.

FINDINGS

Of 125 eligible professionals, 116 (93%) participated (63 [54%] nurses and 53 [46%] physicians; mean age, 38 ± 12 years; 86 [74%] women). Professionals' perception of discomfort differed significantly between patients undergoing open surgery and those undergoing laparoscopic surgery; after open surgery, the most common types were pain (7.1 ± 1.8), movement restriction (7 ± 1.75), and dry mouth (6.6 ± 2.6), whereas after laparoscopic surgery, the most common types were dry mouth (5.85 ± 2.8), abdominal bloating (5.3 ± 2.5), and pain (5 ± 2.2). The Spearman's ρ correlations were inadequate for all items except for dry mouth in open surgery (r = 0.40).

CONCLUSIONS

Pain, movement restriction, abdominal bloating, and dry mouth were the main causes of discomfort. Our findings highlight the need to be vigilant for all manifestations of discomfort after abdominal surgery to enable timely treatment.

A Psychometric Analysis Update of Behavioral Pain Assessment Tools for Noncommunicative, Critically Ill Adults

This is an updated, comprehensive review of the psychometric properties of behavioral pain assessment tools for use with noncommunicative, critically ill adults. Articles were searched in 5 health databases. A total of 106 articles were analyzed, including 54 recently published papers. Nine behavioral pain assessment tools developed for noncommunicative critically ill adults and 4 tools developed for other non-communicative populations were included. The scale development process, reliability, validity, feasibility, and clinical utility were analyzed using a 0 to 20 scoring system, and quality of evidence was also evaluated. The Behavioral Pain Scale, the Behavioral Pain Scale-Nonintubated, and the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool remain the tools with the strongest psychometric properties, with validation testing having been conducted in multiple countries and various languages. Other tools may be good alternatives, but additional research on them is necessary.

Comparison of the Zurich Observation Pain Assessment with the Behavioural Pain Scale and the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool in nonverbal patients in the intensive care unit: A prospective observational study

OBJECTIVES

To determine the concordance of Zurich Observation Pain Assessment (ZOPA) with the behavioural Pain Scale (BPS) and the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) to detect pain in nonverbal ICU patients.

DESIGN

Prospective observational study [BASEC-Nr. PB_2016-02324].

SETTING

A total of 49 ICU patients from cardiovascular, visceral and thoracic surgery and neurology and neurosurgery were recruited. Data from 24 patients were analyzed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Three independent observers assessed pain with the BPS, the CPOT or ZOPA prior, during and after a potential painful nursing intervention. Tools were randomized concerning the pain management after each pain assessment. Frequency of nine additional pain indicating items from a previous qualitative, explorative study was calculated.

RESULTS

ZOPA was positive in 32 of 33 measuring cycles (97.0%; 95%CI: 84.2-99.9%), followed by the CPOT (28/33 cycles, 84.8%; 95%CI: 68.1-94.9%) and the BPS (23/33 cycles, 67.0%; 95%CI: 51.3-84.4%). In 22/33 cycles all tools were concordant (66.7%; 95%CI: 48.2-82.0%). Analgesics were provided in 29 out of 33 cycles (87.9%; 95%CI: 71.8-96.6%). Additional pain indicating items were inconsistently reported.

CONCLUSION

ZOPA is concordant with the BPS and the CPOT to indicate pain but detects pain earlier due to the low threshold value. Inclusion of further items does not improve pain assessment.

Delirium in medical intensive care units: Incidence, subtypes, risk factors, and outcome

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a frequent yet underdiagnosed neuropsychiatric condition encountered in intensive care units (ICUs). Being both a preventable and potentially reversible process associated with significant morbidity and mortality, understanding risk factors that predispose and precipitate delirium in any given patient are critical in ICUs.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to evaluate the incidence, motor subtypes, risk factors, and clinical outcome of delirium in the medical ICU.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used a prospective study design on a cohort of consecutive medical ICU admissions of a tertiary care teaching hospital. The Confusion Assessment Method-ICU and Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale were used to diagnose and motor subtype delirium, respectively, along with a checklist to assess risk factors.

RESULTS

Of the 280 ICU admissions, 88 (31.4%) developed delirium. Hypoactive delirium was the most common motor subtype (55.7%). The detection rate of delirium was 12.5% (lowest for hypoactive delirium at 2.04%). Age, gender, and years of education did not significantly predict delirium (all P > 0.05). Tobacco use, chronic liver disease, and past episodes of delirium significantly predisposed, while mechanical ventilation, hypoxia, fever, raised levels of bilirubin and creatinine, and benzodiazepine administration significantly precipitated ICU delirium. Delirium was significantly associated with longer ICU stay (t = 4.23, P = 0.000) and 1-month postdischarge mortality (χ ² = 6.867, P = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

Detection of delirium is challenging, especially in ICU patients on mechanical ventilation and hypoactive delirium. Screening and monitoring for predisposing and precipitating risk factors can greatly improve the odds of detection and intervention as ICU delirium is associated with significant morbidity and mortality.

Pain measurement techniques: spotlight on mechanically ventilated patients

Background

Procedural pain is a frequent problem in intensive care units (ICUs). For that, pain assessment has been increasingly introduced to the ICU professional’s routine, and studies have been developed to show the relevance of measuring pain in critically ill patients.

Objective

This review aimed to describe pain measurement techniques for mechanically ventilated adult patients based on evidence and already published.

Method

Systematic literature search was performed on PubMed and Google Scholar. Keywords “pain”, “pain measurement”, “intensive care units” and “respiration, artificial” were combined to the Boolean operator AND. No language or publication year was limited in this search. The purpose and method of all papers were analyzed and only studies which described pain assessment in mechanically ventilated patients were included in this review.

Results

Objective methods were found in the literature to assess pain in mechanically ventilated adults. Behavioral scales were the most used method for pain measurement in noncommunicative patients. Vital signs were used, but the reliability of this method was questioned. Pupillometry, bispectral index and skin conductance were found and described as pain assessment methods.

Conclusion

This review showed that objective measures, as behavioral scales, are the gold standard tools to measure pain intensity in noncommunicative subjects. These data contribute to professionals’ knowledge about ICU pain measurement and emphasize its importance and consequences for adequate pain management.

Discordant Relationship Between Evaluation of Facial Expression and Subjective Pain Rating Due to the Low Pain Magnitude

Introduction

Facial expression to pain is an important pain indicator; however, facial movements look unresponsive when perceiving mild pain. The present study investigates whether pain magnitude modulates the relationship between subjective pain rating and an observer's evaluation of facial expression.

Methods

Twelve healthy volunteers were recruited to obtain 108 samples for pain rating with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Subjects underwent three different mechanical painful stimuli (monofilament forces of 100 g, 300 g, and 600 g) over three sessions and their facial expressions were videotaped throughout all sessions. Three observers independently evaluated facial expression of the subjects with a four-point categorical scale (no pain, mild pain, moderate pain, and severe pain). The correlations between subjective pain ratings and the evaluation of facial expression were analyzed in dichotomous group which was low pain ratings (VAS<30), or high pain rating (VAS≥30).

Results

Subjective pain ratings was significantly correlated with the evaluation of facial expression in high pain ratings, however no correlation was found between them in mild pain ratings. In mild pain ratings, most of the subjects (78%) were rated as no pain by observers, despite the fact that subjects reported pain.

Conclusion

The results suggest that the evaluation of facial expression of pain was difficult for the observer to detect pain severity when the subjects feel mild pain.

Pain and respiration: a systematic review

Breathing techniques are commonly used to alleviate pain. Despite their frequent use, surprisingly little is known about their efficacy as well as their underlying physiological mechanisms. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize and critically appraise the results of existing studies on the association between respiration and pain, and to highlight a potential physiological mechanism underlying the respiration-pain connection. A total of 31 publications from between 1984 and 2015 were retrieved and analyzed. These articles were classified into 4 groups: experimental and clinical studies of the effect of pain on respiration, clinical studies of the effects of breathing techniques on pain, and experimental studies of the influence of various forms of respiration on laboratory-induced pain. The findings suggest that pain influences respiration by increasing its flow, frequency, and volume. Furthermore, paced slow breathing is associated with pain reduction in some of the studies, but evidence elucidating the underlying physiological mechanisms of this effect is lacking. Here, we focus on the potential role of the cardiovascular system on the respiratory modulation of pain. Further research is definitely warranted.

Measuring Acute Pain Over Time in the Critically Ill Using the Multidimensional Objective Pain Assessment Tool (MOPAT)

BACKGROUND

A valid and reliable instrument is needed to assess acute pain in critically ill patients unable to self-report and who may be transitioning between critical care and other settings.

AIM

To examine the reliability, validity, and clinical utility of the Multidimensional Objective Pain Assessment Tool (MOPAT) when used over time by critical care nurses to assess acute pain in non-communicative critically ill patients.

METHODS

Twenty-seven patients had pain assessed at two time points (T1 and T2) surrounding a painful event for up to 3 days. Twenty-one ICU nurses participated in pain assessments and completed the Clinical Utility Questionnaire.

RESULTS

Internal consistency reliability coefficient alphas for the MOPAT were .68 at T1 and .72 at T2. Inter-rater agreement during painful procedures or turning was 68% for the behavioral dimension and 80% for the physiologic dimension. Validity was evidenced by decreases (p < .001) in the MOPAT total and behavioral and physiologic dimension scores when comparing T1 and T2. Nurses found the tool clinically useful.

CONCLUSION

The MOPAT can be used in the critical care setting as a helpful tool to assess pain in non-communicative patients. The MOPAT is unique in that the instrument can be used over time and across settings.

Pain assessment in the critically ill mechanically ventilated adult patients: Comparison between skin conductance algesimeter index and physiologic indicators

Background and Objectives:

Critically ill patients are unable to communicate effectively, so it is difficult to assess their pain and analgesic requirement. Skin conductance algesimeter (SCA) index is a device that primarily measures changes in skin conductance real time to assess pain.

Methods:

We planned this quantitative prospective observational study to assess pain in the critically ill mechanically ventilated patients in comparison to physiologic indicators such as blood pressure and heart rate. A repeated measures design was chosen, and a sample size of 180 was taken from 60 patients with sepsis, acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, community-acquired pneumonia, and postsurgical patients in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). The two painful procedures chosen were tracheal suction and patient positioning. The data were collected at rest, at tracheal suctioning, 20 min later at positioning of the patient, and final reading 20 min later. Three testing periods, each including 4 assessments for a total of 12 pain assessments with sixty patients, were completed during each patient's ICU course. A total of six assessments were done with the patient at rest and three each with pain stimulus of tracheal suctioning and patient positioning.

Results:

There was a significant increase in both hemodynamic variables during painful procedures except for the heart rate during positioning. The correlation between the SCA index and Ramsay scale was negative and significant.

Conclusions:

This instrument might prove useful to measure pain in uncommunicative critically ill patients and to evaluate the effectiveness of analgesic treatment and adapt it.

Comparison between Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool and physiologic indicators for pain assessment in the critically ill, mechanically ventilated adult patients

Background and Objectives:

Pain assessment of nonverbal, critically ill patients continues to present a challenge in Intensive Care Unit (ICU). The Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) rates critically ill patients’ pain based on clinical observation. In the present study, the accuracy of CPOT was compared with physiological indicators of pain in mechanically ventilated, critically ill patients.

Methods:

This quantitative prospective observational study was conducted to assess pain in the critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients in comparison to physiologic indicators such as blood pressure and heart rate. A repeated measures design was chosen, and a sample size of 180 was taken from 60 patients with sepsis, acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, community-acquired pneumonia, and postsurgical patients in the ICU. The two painful procedures chosen were tracheal suction and patient positioning. The data were collected at rest, at tracheal suctioning, 20 min later at positioning of the patient, and final reading 20 min later. Three testing periods, each including 4 assessments for a total of 12 pain assessments with sixty patients, were completed during each patient's ICU course. A total of six assessments were done with the patient at rest and three each with pain stimulus of tracheal suctioning and patient positioning.

Results:

There was a significant increase in both hemodynamic variables (systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure) during painful procedures except for the heart rate during positioning. The correlation between the CPOT and Ramsay scale was negative and significant.

Conclusions:

The present study provides evidence that the CPOT has good psychometric properties. It might prove useful for pain assessment in uncommunicative critically ill patients.

Association Between Acute Pain and Hemodynamic Parameters in a Postoperative Surgical Intensive Care Unit

I conducted a prospective repeated-measure study in the general surgery intensive care unit to investigate the associations among acute postoperative pain, analgesic therapy, and hemodynamic parameters. I selected 33 patients and recorded 84 episodes of pain. I measured intensity of pain and hemodynamic parameters after patients were transferred from the postanesthesia care unit to the general surgery intensive care unit, immediately before analgesic therapy and at 15, 30, and 45 minutes after analgesic therapy. Acute pain increased systolic (SBP), diastolic (DBP), and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP); pulse rate (PR); and arterial oxygen saturation. Fifteen minutes after analgesic therapy, SBP and PR decreased, and DBP, MAP, and oxygen saturation increased. Thirty minutes after therapy, SBP, MAP, and PR decreased, and DBP and oxygen saturation increased. Forty-five minutes after therapy, SBP, MAP, and PR decreased, and DBP and oxygen saturation increased. I saw no significant hemodynamic parameter changes during postoperative episodes of pain.

Altered Behavioral and Autonomic Pain Responses in Alzheimer's Disease Are Associated with Dysfunctional Affective, Self-Reflective and Salience Network Resting-State Connectivity

While pain behaviors are increased in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients compared to healthy seniors (HS) across multiple disease stages, autonomic responses are reduced with advancing AD. To better understand the neural mechanisms underlying these phenomena, we undertook a controlled cross-sectional study examining behavioral (Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia, PAINAD scores) and autonomic (heart rate, HR) pain responses in 24 HS and 20 AD subjects using acute pressure stimuli. Resting-state fMRI was utilized to investigate how group connectivity differences were related to altered pain responses. Pain behaviors (slope of PAINAD score change and mean PAINAD score) were increased in patients vs.

CONTROLS

Autonomic measures (HR change intercept and mean HR change) were reduced in severe vs. mildly affected AD patients. Group functional connectivity differences associated with greater pain behavior reactivity in patients included: connectivity within a temporal limbic network (TLN) and between the TLN and ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC); between default mode network (DMN) subcomponents; between the DMN and ventral salience network (vSN). Reduced HR responses within the AD group were associated with connectivity changes within the DMN and vSN-specifically the precuneus and vmPFC. Discriminant classification indicated HR-related connectivity within the vSN to the vmPFC best distinguished AD severity. Thus, altered behavioral and autonomic pain responses in AD reflects dysfunction of networks and structures subserving affective, self-reflective, salience and autonomic regulation.

Pain Assessment in INTensive care (PAINT): an observational study of physician-documented pain assessment in 45 intensive care units in the United Kingdom

Pain is a common and distressing symptom experienced by intensive care patients. Assessing pain in this environment is challenging, and published guidelines have been inconsistently implemented. The Pain Assessment in INTensive care (PAINT) study aimed to evaluate the frequency and type of physician pain assessments with respect to published guidelines. This observational service evaluation considered all pain and analgesia-related entries in patients' records over a 24-h period, in 45 adult intensive care units (ICUs) in London and the South-East of England. Data were collected from 750 patients, reflecting the practice of 362 physicians. Nearly two-thirds of patients (n = 475, 64.5%, 95%CI 60.9-67.8%) received no physician-documented pain assessment during the 24-h study period. Just under one-third (n = 215, 28.6%, 95%CI 25.5-32.0%) received no nursing-documented pain assessment, and over one-fifth (n = 159, 21.2%, 95%CI 19.2-23.4)% received neither a doctor nor a nursing pain assessment. Two of the 45 ICUs used validated behavioural pain assessment tools. The likelihood of receiving a physician pain assessment was affected by the following factors: the number of nursing assessments performed; whether the patient was admitted as a surgical patient; the presence of tracheal tube or tracheostomy; and the length of stay in ICU. Physician-documented pain assessments in the majority of participating ICUs were infrequent and did not utilise recommended behavioural pain assessment tools. Further research to identify factors influencing physician pain assessment behaviour in ICU, such as human factors or cultural attitudes, is urgently needed.

Pain Assessment in Noncommunicative Adult Palliative Care Patients

Palliative care patients who have pain are often unable to self-report their pain, placing them at increased risk for underrecognized and undertreated pain. Use of appropriate pain assessment tools significantly enhances the likelihood of effective pain management and improved pain-related outcomes. This paper reviews selected tools and provides palliative care clinicians with a practical approach to selecting a pain assessment tool for noncommunicative adult patients.

[Validation of the Brazilian version of Behavioral Pain Scale in adult sedated and mechanically ventilated patients]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The Behavioral Pain Scale is a pain assessment tool for uncommunicative and sedated Intensive Care Unit patients. The lack of a Brazilian scale for pain assessment in adults mechanically ventilated justifies the relevance of this study that aimed to validate the Brazilian version of Behavioral Pain Scale as well as to correlate its scores with the records of physiological parameters, sedation level and severity of disease.

METHODS

Twenty-five Intensive Care Unit adult patients were included in this study. The Brazilian Behavioral Pain Scale version (previously translated and culturally adapted) and the recording of physiological parameters were performed by two investigators simultaneously during rest, during eye cleaning (non-painful stimulus) and during endotracheal suctioning (painful stimulus).

RESULTS

High values of responsiveness coefficient (coefficient=3.22) were observed. The Cronbach's alpha of total Behavioral Pain Scale score at eye cleaning and endotracheal suctioning was 0.8. The intraclass correlation coefficient of total Behavioral Pain Scale score was ≥ 0.8 at eye cleaning and endotracheal suctioning. There was a significant highest Behavioral Pain Scale score during application of painful procedure when compared with rest period (p≤0.0001). However, no correlations were observed between pain and hemodynamic parameters, sedation level, and severity of disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This pioneer validation study of Brazilian Behavioral Pain Scale exhibits satisfactory index of internal consistency, interrater reliability, responsiveness and validity. Therefore, the Brazilian Behavioral Pain Scale version was considered a valid instrument for being used in adult sedated and mechanically ventilated patients in Brazil.

Association between lymphocyte expression of the apoptotic receptor Fas and pain in critically ill patients

Objective

Lymphocyte apoptosis in critical illness is associated with immunosuppression. We explored for the first time the associations between pain ratings and expression of the apoptotic receptor Fas on B and T cells in critically ill patients and the potential mediating effects of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), cortisol, and substance P (SP).

Design

This is an exploratory correlational study with repeated measurements (14 days followup) and cross-sectional comparisons.

Setting

This study was conducted in a state hospital in the metropolitan area of Athens, Greece.

Participants

The participants were 36 consecutive critically ill patients and 36 matched controls.

Outcome measures

Pain measured by the self-reported numeric rating scale [NRS], the behavioral pain scale, and the pain assessment scale was the primary outcome measure. Flow cytometry (Fas), electrochemiluminescence (ACTH and cortisol) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (SP) were used. Mixed linear models for repeated measurements and bivariable associations at discrete time points were employed.

Results

Significant pain at rest was noted. Pain ratings associated with Fas expression on cytotoxic T cells (P=0.041) and B cells (P=0.005), even after adjustment for a number of clinical treatment factors (P=0.006 and P=0.052, respectively). On the day that more patients were able to communicate, Fas on B cells (r=0.897, P=0.029) and cytotoxic T cells (r=0.832; P=0.037) associated with NRS ratings. Associations between pain ratings and ACTH serum levels were noted (P<0.05). When stress neuropeptide levels were added to the model, the statistical significance of the associations between pain ratings and Fas expression was attenuated (P=0.052–0.063), suggesting that stress neuropeptides may partially mediate the association.

Conclusion

Preliminary evidence for the association between pain and lymphocyte apoptotic susceptibility is provided. The role of pain management in maintaining immunocompetence in critical illness is worth exploring.

Analgesia in the surgical intensive care unit

Critically ill patients are a heterogeneous group with diverse comorbidities and physiological derangements. The management of pain in the critically ill population is emerging as a standard of care in the intensive care unit (ICU). Pain control of critically ill patients in the ICU presents numerous challenges to intensivists. Inconsistencies in pain assessment, analgesic prescription and variation in monitoring sedation and analgesia result in suboptimal pain management. Inadequate pain control can have deleterious effects on several organ systems in critically ill patients. Therefore, it becomes incumbent on physicians and nurses caring for these patients to carefully evaluate their practice on pain management and adopt an optimal pain management strategy that includes a reduction in noxious stimuli, adequate analgesia and promoting education regarding sedation and analgesia to the ICU staff. Mechanistic approaches and multimodal analgesic techniques have been clearly demonstrated to be the most effective pain management strategy to improve outcomes. For example, recent evidence suggests that the use of short acting analgesics and analgesic adjuncts for sedation is superior to hypnotic based sedation in intubated patients. This review will address analgesia in the ICU, including opioid therapy, adjuncts, regional anaesthesia and non-pharmacological options that can provide a multimodal approach to treating pain.

Behavioral Pain Scale - translation, reliability, and validity in a Swedish context

BACKGROUND

Assessing pain in the intensive care unit (ICU) is challenging. Due to intubation and sedation, communication can be limited. International guidelines recommend assessing pain with instruments based on behavioral parameters when critically ill patients are unable to self-report their pain level. One of the recommended instruments, the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS), has shown good validity and reliability in international studies. The aim of this study was to translate and adapt the BPS for critically ill intubated and non-intubated patients in a Swedish ICU context and to assess inter-rater reliability and discriminant validity.

METHODS

The BPS (both for intubated and non-intubated patients) was translated and adapted into Swedish using a translation method consisting of ten steps. The Swedish version was then tested for inter-rater reliability and discriminant validity on 20 critically ill patients (10 intubated and 10 non-intubated) before and directly after a potentially painful procedure (repositioning).

RESULTS

The Swedish version of the BPS showed inter-rater reliability with a percentage agreement of 85% when tested on a sample of critically ill patients. The instrument also showed discriminant validity between assessments at rest and after repositioning.

CONCLUSION

Results of the Swedish version of the BPS support its use in critically ill patients who cannot self-report their pain level. Still, additional studies are needed to further explore its reliability and validity in the Swedish ICU context.

Care-related Pain in Critically Ill Mechanically Ventilated Patients

Despite advances in pain management, critically ill patients continue to have unacceptably high rates of uncontrolled pain. Using the Behavioural Pain Scale and physiological indicators of pain, this study examines pain levels in mechanically ventilated patients prior to and during routine nursing procedures. A prospective descriptive design was used to assess and describe care-related pain associated with nociceptive procedures (repositioning, endotracheal suctioning, and vascular punctures) and non-nociceptive procedures (mouth care, eye care and dressing change). A sample of 247 mechanically ventilated Jordanian patients was recruited from intensive care units in a military hospital. The overall mean procedural pain score of 6.34 (standard deviation [SD] 2.36) was significantly higher than the mean preprocedural pain score of 3.43 (SD 0.67, t[246] = 20.82, P <0.001). The highest mean procedural pain scores were observed during repositioning (9.25, SD 1.29). Few patients received analgesics and/or sedatives in the hour prior to the procedures. The mean Ramsay Scale score was 2.49 (SD 0.95), indicating that patients were either anxious or responsive to command only. The mean physiological indicators of pain increased during repositioning and endotracheal suctioning and decreased during the rest of the procedures. Mechanically ventilated patients experience pain prior to and during routine nursing procedures. Harmless and comfort procedures are actually painful. When caring for nonverbal critically ill patients, clinicians need to consider care-related pain associated with their interventions. Relying on changes in vital signs as a primary indicator of pain can be misleading.

Pathophysiology, assessment, and management of pain in critically ill adults

PURPOSE

The pathophysiology of pain in critically ill patients, the role of pain assessment in optimal pain management, and pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic strategies for pain prevention and treatment are reviewed.

SUMMARY

There are many short- and long-term consequences of inadequately treated pain, including hyperglycemia, insulin resistance, an increased risk of infection, decreased patient comfort and satisfaction, and the development of chronic pain. Clinicians should have an understanding of the basic physiology of pain and the patient populations that are affected. Pain should be assessed using validated pain scales that are appropriate for the patient's communication status. Opioids are the cornerstone of pain treatment. The use of opioids, administered via bolus dosing or continuous infusion, should be guided by patient-specific goals of care in order to avoid adverse events. A multimodal approach to pain management, including the use of regional analgesia, may improve patient outcomes and decrease opioid-related adverse events, though there are limited relevant data in adult critically ill patient populations. Nonpharmacologic strategies have been shown to be effective adjuncts to pharmacologic regimens that can improve patient-reported pain intensity and reduce analgesic requirements. Analgesic regimens need to take into account patient-specific factors and be closely monitored for safety and efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Acute pain management in the critically ill is a largely underassessed and undertreated area of critical care. Opioids are the cornerstone of treatment, though a multimodal approach may improve patient outcomes and decrease opioid-related adverse events.

Development of a pain management algorithm for intensive care units

OBJECTIVES

To develop a pain management algorithm for intensive care unit (ICU) patients and to evaluate the psychometric properties of the translated tools used in the algorithm.

BACKGROUND

Many ICU patients experience pain. However, an evidence-based algorithm for pain management does not exist.

METHODS

Literature review, expert panel, and pilot testing were used to develop the algorithm. The tools were evaluated for inter-rater reliability between two nurses. Discriminant validity was evaluated by comparing pain during turning and rest.

RESULTS

An algorithm was developed. The Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) and the Behavioral Pain Scale-Non Intubated (BPS-NI) discriminated between pain scores during turning and rest. Inter-rater reliability for the BPS varied from moderate (0.46) to very good (1.00). Inter-rater reliability for the BPS-NI varied from fair (0.21) to good (0.63).

CONCLUSIONS

The content of the pain management algorithm is consistent with the latest clinical practice guideline recommendations. It may be a useful tool to improve pain assessment and management in adult ICU patients.

Acute pain assessment tools: let us move beyond simple pain ratings

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review highlights challenges and current trends in tools used to assess acute pain across the lifespan.

RECENT FINDINGS

A plethora of similar assessment tools exist for acute pain, most focused on self-report of pain intensity. Attempts to improve the frequency and visibility of pain assessment by prompting pain as 'the fifth vital sign' resulted in unintended consequences, creating a pressing need for a conceptual shift to multidimensional assessment of acute pain.

SUMMARY

Valid and pragmatic assessment of pain is essential for effective pain management. Unidimensional scales that capture self-reported pain intensity ratings undervalue to the complexity of the pain experience. Pain is a biopsychosocial experience and assessment is a complex social transaction and an exchange of the meaning of pain that demands a more comprehensive approach.

Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the behavioral pain scale in intubated and non-intubated critically ill patients: Two cross-sectional studies

BACKGROUND

Self-report pain assessment scales may be inappropriate when critically ill patients are incapable of adequate communication because of sedation or mechanical ventilation. The Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS, for intubated patients) and the BPS-non intubated (BPS-NI, for non-intubated patients) measure objective behavioral indicators of pain in non-communicating critically ill patients.

OBJECTIVES

To develop a Chinese version of the BPS combining the original version of the BPS and BPS-NI suitable for pain assessment among critically ill patients and to determine its reliability and validity.

DESIGN

Two cross-sectional studies.

SETTINGS

A 15-bed surgical intensive care unit (ICU) in a teaching hospital in Beijing, China.

PARTICIPANTS

In the first study, 129 patients (53 intubated and 76 non-intubated) were recruited; in the second study, 83 (43 intubated and 40 non-intubated) were recruited.

METHODS

The Chinese version of the BPS (BPS-C) was developed via rigorous translation methods, including double back-translation and content validation involving 13 clinical experts. Internal consistency, discriminative validity, and criterion-related validity were established using the BPS-C and the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). The BPS-C and NRS were used to assess pain in 53 intubated and 76 non-intubated post-abdominal surgery patients during low pain exposure and increased pain exposure in the first study. To establish interrater reliability, a researcher and a bedside nurse independently performed 172 paired assessments in 43 intubated patients and 160 paired assessments in 40 non-intubated patients with the BPS-C under the same conditions in the second study.

RESULTS

The BPS-C achieved conceptual and semantic equivalence with the original tool. Internal consistency was established through Cronbach's alpha (α=0.724-0.743 in intubated patients, α=0.701-0.762 in non-intubated patients). Interrater reliability was confirmed through the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), which ranged from 0.962 to 1.000 in both intubated and non-intubated patients with high agreement percentages (95.3-100.0% in intubated and 95.0-100.0% in non-intubated patients). BPS-C scores during increased exposure to pain were significantly higher than those obtained during low exposure to pain, indicating discriminative validity. Criterion-related validity was confirmed by strong positive correlations between BPS-C and NRS scores (Pearson's correlations r=0.815-0.937 for intubated patients, Pearson's correlations r=0.755-0.899 for non-intubated patients).

CONCLUSIONS

The Chinese version of the BPS (BPS-C) is appropriate for pain assessment among intubated and non-intubated ICU patients.

Pain management in critically ill patients: a review of multimodal treatment options

Pain management for critically ill patients provides physicians with the challenge of maximizing patient comfort while avoiding the risks that arise with oversedation. Preventing oversedation has become increasingly important as we better understand the negative impact it has on patients' experiences and outcomes. Current research suggests that oversedation can result in complications such as thromboembolism, pulmonary compromise, immunosuppression and delirium. Fortunately, the analgesic options available for physicians to limit these complications are growing as more treatment modalities are being researched and implemented in the intensive care unit. Our goal is to outline some of the effective and widely utilized tools available to physicians to appropriately and safely manage pain while avoiding oversedation in the critically ill population.

Ten Myths and Misconceptions Regarding Pain Management in the ICU

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this article is to expose common myths and misconceptions regarding pain assessment and management in critically ill patients that interfere with effective care. We comprehensively review the literature refuting these myths and misconceptions and describe evidence-based strategies for improving pain management in the ICU.

DATA SOURCES

Current peer-reviewed academic journals, as well as standards and guidelines from professional societies.

STUDY SELECTION

The most current evidence was selected for review based on the highest degree of supportive evidence.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were obtained via medical search databases, including OvidSP, and the National Library of Medicine's MEDLINE database via PubMed.

DATA SYNTHESIS

After a comprehensive literature review, conclusions were drawn based on the strength of evidence and the most current understanding of pain management practices in ICU.

CONCLUSIONS

Myths and misconceptions regarding management of pain in the ICU are prevalent. Review of current evidence refutes these myths and misconceptions and provides insights and recommendations to ensure best practices.

Validation of the Behavioural Indicators of Pain Scale ESCID for pain assessment in non-communicative and mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a research protocol

AIM

To investigate the validity and reliability of the Behavioural Indicators of Pain Scale (ESCID) in medically and surgically non-communicative and mechanically ventilated critical patients.

BACKGROUND

Scales based on behavioural indicators of pain are suggested to measure pain in non-communicative critically ill patients. Scales proposed thus far have a range not comparable to those used with patients who can report their pain. A scale with a 0-10 range and more behavioural indicators is proposed to improve the detection and measurement of pain.

DESIGN

A multicentre prospective observational design to validate a scale-measuring instrument.

METHODS

Three hundred non-communicative and mechanically ventilated critical patients from 20 different intensive care units will be observed for 5 minutes before, during and 15 minutes after three procedures: turning, tracheal suctioning and soft friction with gauze on healthy tissue. Two independent observers will assess the pain of subjects with the Behavioural Pain Scale and the ESCID scale simultaneously. Descriptive and inferential statistics will be used. Student's t-test will be used to compare components of the twos scales. Inter-rater and intrarater agreement will be investigated. The reliability scale will be measured using Cronbach's alpha. Approval date for this protocol was January 2012.

DISCUSSION

A greater number of behavioural indicators in the ESCID scale than in previously validated scales, with a 0-10 score range, can improve the detection and measurement of pain in non-communicative and mechanically ventilated critical patients. Funding granted in 2011 by the Spanish Health Research Fund (PI 11/00766, Health Ministry).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Study registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01744717).

Assessment of discomfort in patients with cognitive failure in palliative care

OBJECTIVE

When cognitive impairment precludes patients' report of symptoms, it becomes necessary to use other means. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the validity of the method currently in use on our service.

METHOD

Two members of the team simultaneously assessed the patient and independently recorded whether the patient showed signs of discomfort, and a third questioned patients with cognitive failure who maintained some ability to respond if something was bothering them.

RESULTS

Some 200 assessments were made of 116 patients. The kappa coefficient of agreement was 0.615. The sensitivity was 17% and specificity 99%. The positive predictive value was 88%, and the negative predictive value was 73%.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Due to the low sensitivity of this method, it cannot be recommended as a screening tool.

Psychometric Analysis of Behavioral Pain Scale Brazilian Version in Sedated and Mechanically Ventilated Adult Patients: A Preliminary Study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Pain assessment in Intensive Care Units (ICU) can be performed based on validated instruments as the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS). Despite the existence of this clinical score, there is no Brazilian version of it to assess critically ill patients. This study aimed to translate the BPS into Brazilian Portuguese, verify its psychometric properties (reliability, validity, and responsiveness) and the correlation between pain measured and heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), Ramsay, and RASS scores.

METHODS

Pain intensity by using Brazilian BPS version, HR, and BP were observed by 2 investigators during 3 different moments: at rest; during eye cleaning (EC); and tracheal suctioning (TS) in 15 adult subjects sedated and mechanically ventilated. Sedation level, severity of disease, and use of sedatives and analgesic drugs were also recorded.

RESULTS

There was a high responsiveness coefficient (coefficient = 1.72) and pain was significantly higher during tracheal suctioning (P ≤ 0.003) and eye cleaning (P ≤ 0.04) than at rest. It was evidenced a low reliability and no significant correlation between translated BPS scores and physiological parameters during tracheal suctioning, sedation scales, flow of the sedatives drugs, or with the general health status (P > 0.07).

CONCLUSION

Brazilian BPS has high responsiveness and capacity to detect pain intensity in different situations in the ICU routine. This preliminary study proved the feasibility and importance of valid this scale in Brazil in order to improve critically ill patients care.

[Pain assessment using the Facial Action Coding System. A systematic review]

Self-reporting is the most widely used pain measurement tool, although it may not be useful in patients with loss or deficit in communication skills. The aim of this paper was to undertake a systematic review of the literature of pain assessment through the Facial Action Coding System (FACS). The initial search found 4,335 references and, within the restriction «FACS», these were reduced to 40 (after exclusion of duplicates). Finally, only 26 articles meeting the inclusion criteria were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the GRADE system. Most patients were adults and elderly health conditions, or cognitive deficits and/or chronic pain. Our conclusion is that FACS is a reliable and objective tool in the detection and quantification of pain in all patients.

A randomized controlled trial of fentanyl in the pre-emptive treatment of pain associated with turning in patients under mechanical ventilation: research protocol

AIM

To compare the effectiveness and safety of fentanyl with placebo as pre-emptive treatment for pain associated with turning in patients in intensive care units.

BACKGROUND

Turning is frequently a painful procedure in this setting. Pre-emptive administration of supplementary analgesia may help decrease this pain. However, medical literature on pre-emptive analgesia in these patients is scarce.

DESIGN

A randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial.

METHODS

This study will assess the benefits and risks of pre-emptive analgesia with fentanyl compared with placebo on turning-associated pain. Eighty patients will be recruited from among those older than 18 years and needing mechanical ventilation for at least 24 hours. Pain intensity will be assessed using the Behavioral Pain Scale. Primary outcome will be pain intensity between the baseline and 30 minutes after turning, measured by the area under the curve of the pain scale scores. Secondary outcomes will be the usefulness of physiological parameters and the Bispectral Index to measure pain and the safety of pre-emptive fentanyl in turning. The study protocol was approved in February 2011.

DISCUSSION

If pre-emptive fentanyl is more effective than placebo and reasonably safe, the results of the current study may change nursing attitude in managing turning in critically ill patients. As a consequence, pain may be decreased during this nursing procedure.

Nurses' evaluations of the CPOT use at 12-month post-implementation in the intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Performing routine pain assessments with all intensive care unit (ICU) patients is strongly recommended in clinical practice guidelines. As many ICU patients are unable to self-report, the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) is one of the two behavioural pain scales suggested for clinical use. Still, no study has described the evaluations of its use in ICU daily practice.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the nurses' evaluation of the feasibility, clinical relevance and satisfaction with the CPOT use 12 months after its implementation in the ICU.

METHOD

A descriptive design was used. It was conducted in the medical-surgical ICU of a university affiliated setting at Greenfield Park (Québec, Canada). A self-administered evaluation questionnaire including four sections (i.e. feasibility, clinical relevance, satisfaction and socio-demographic information) was completed by ICU nurses who were all trained to use the CPOT. The questionnaires were completed anonymously.

RESULTS

A total of 38 ICU nurses returned their completed questionnaire (63% participation rate). Regarding its feasibility, the majority rated the CPOT as quick to use, simple to understand and easy to complete (92-100%). According to clinical relevance, close to 70% of ICU nurses acknowledged that the CPOT had influenced their practice, but lower results (<50%) were found for effective communication of pain assessment findings with the physicians and other health professionals. More than 80% of ICU nurses were satisfied with its daily use.

CONCLUSION

The CPOT use was deemed feasible and relevant in daily practice as per the nurses' evaluations but did not allow an effective communication with other ICU care team members.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Training should be offered to all members of the ICU care team, and other implementation strategies should be explored as well to ensure optimal uptake of a pain assessment approach which impacts on their decision-making process for pain management.

Pain in Intensive Care: A Personalised Healthcare Approach

For patients admitted to intensive care, pain is a common experience with potentially significant consequences. Pain management needs to evolve from the traditional ‘one-size-fits-all’ plan to a more personalised approach. This can be achieved by appreciating the numerous potential causes of pain, using appropriate assessment tools, utilising a range of potential treatment options and addressing the challenges associated with pain management in this heterogeneous population. At this point a truly multimodal, multidisciplinary management plan can be implemented, aimed at improving pain control and ultimately patient outcomes.

Facial expression as an indicator of pain in critically ill intubated adults during endotracheal suctioning

BACKGROUND

Facial expression is often used to evaluate pain in noncommunicative critically ill patients.

OBJECTIVES

To describe facial behavior during endotracheal suctioning, determine facial behaviors that characterize the pain response, and describe the effect of patient factors on facial behavior during pain response.

METHODS

Fifty noncommunicative patients receiving mechanical ventilation were video recorded during 2 phases (rest and endotracheal suctioning). Pain ratings were gathered by using the Behavioral Pain Scale. Facial behaviors were coded by using the Facial Action Coding System for 30 seconds for each phase.

RESULTS

Fourteen facial actions were associated more with endotracheal suctioning than with rest (z = 5.78; P < .001). The sum of intensity of the 14 actions correlated with total mean scores on the Behavioral Pain Scale (ρ = 0.71; P < .001) and with the facial expression component of the scale (ρ = 0.67; P < .001) during suctioning. In stepwise multivariate analysis, 5 pain-relevant facial behaviors (brow raiser, brow lower, nose wrinkling, head turned right, and head turned up) accounted for 71% of the variance (adjusted R² = 0.682; P < .001) in pain response. The sum of intensity of the 5 actions correlated with total mean scores on the behavioral scale (ρ = 0.72; P < .001) and with the facial expression component of that scale (ρ = 0.61; P < .001) during suctioning. Patient factors had no association with pain intensity scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Upper facial expressions are most frequently activated during pain response in noncommunicative critically ill patients and might be a valid alternative to self-report ratings.

Observational Pain Scales in Critically Ill Adults

Pain is a common and distressing symptom in critically ill patients. Uncontrolled pain places patients at risk for numerous adverse psychological and physiological consequences, some of which may be life-threatening. A systematic assessment of pain is difficult in intensive care units because of the high percentage of patients who are noncommunicative and unable to self-report pain. Several tools have been developed to identify objective measures of pain, but the best tool has yet to be identified. A comprehensive search on the reliability and validity of observational pain scales indicated that although the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool was superior to other tools in reliably detecting pain, pain assessment in individuals incapable of spontaneous neuromuscular movements or in patients with concurrent conditions, such as chronic pain or delirium, remains an enigma.

The pain, agitation, and delirium practice guidelines for adult critically ill patients: a post-publication perspective

The recently published Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Pain, Agitation, and Delirium in Adult Patients in the Intensive Care Unit differ from earlier guidelines in the following ways: literature searches were performed in eight databases by a professional librarian; psychometric validation of assessment scales was considered in their recommendation; discrepancies in recommendation votes by guideline panel members are available in online supplements; and all recommendations were made exclusively on the basis of evidence available until December of 2010. Pain recognition and management remains challenging in the critically ill. Patient outcomes improve with routine pain assessment, use of co-analgesics and administration as well as dose adjustment of opiates to patient needs. Thoracic epidurals help ease patients undergoing abdominal aortic surgery. Little data exists to guide clinicians as to the type or dose of co-analgesics; no opiate choice is associated with better patient outcomes. Lighter or no sedation is beneficial, and interruption is desirable in patients who require deep sedation for specific pathologic states. Delirium screening is probably useful; no treatment modality can be unequivocally recommended, and the benefit of prophylaxis is established only for early mobilization. The details of these recommendations, as well as more recent publications that complement the guidelines, are provided in this commentary.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of pain, agitation, and delirium in adult patients in the intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE

To revise the "Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Sustained Use of Sedatives and Analgesics in the Critically Ill Adult" published in Critical Care Medicine in 2002.

METHODS

The American College of Critical Care Medicine assembled a 20-person, multidisciplinary, multi-institutional task force with expertise in guideline development, pain, agitation and sedation, delirium management, and associated outcomes in adult critically ill patients. The task force, divided into four subcommittees, collaborated over 6 yr in person, via teleconferences, and via electronic communication. Subcommittees were responsible for developing relevant clinical questions, using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation method (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org) to review, evaluate, and summarize the literature, and to develop clinical statements (descriptive) and recommendations (actionable). With the help of a professional librarian and Refworks database software, they developed a Web-based electronic database of over 19,000 references extracted from eight clinical search engines, related to pain and analgesia, agitation and sedation, delirium, and related clinical outcomes in adult ICU patients. The group also used psychometric analyses to evaluate and compare pain, agitation/sedation, and delirium assessment tools. All task force members were allowed to review the literature supporting each statement and recommendation and provided feedback to the subcommittees. Group consensus was achieved for all statements and recommendations using the nominal group technique and the modified Delphi method, with anonymous voting by all task force members using E-Survey (http://www.esurvey.com). All voting was completed in December 2010. Relevant studies published after this date and prior to publication of these guidelines were referenced in the text. The quality of evidence for each statement and recommendation was ranked as high (A), moderate (B), or low/very low (C). The strength of recommendations was ranked as strong (1) or weak (2), and either in favor of (+) or against (-) an intervention. A strong recommendation (either for or against) indicated that the intervention's desirable effects either clearly outweighed its undesirable effects (risks, burdens, and costs) or it did not. For all strong recommendations, the phrase "We recommend …" is used throughout. A weak recommendation, either for or against an intervention, indicated that the trade-off between desirable and undesirable effects was less clear. For all weak recommendations, the phrase "We suggest …" is used throughout. In the absence of sufficient evidence, or when group consensus could not be achieved, no recommendation (0) was made. Consensus based on expert opinion was not used as a substitute for a lack of evidence. A consistent method for addressing potential conflict of interest was followed if task force members were coauthors of related research. The development of this guideline was independent of any industry funding.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide a roadmap for developing integrated, evidence-based, and patient-centered protocols for preventing and treating pain, agitation, and delirium in critically ill patients.