Validation of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool With Seriously Ill Patients

Evidence-Based Pain Assessment in Nonverbal Palliative Care Patients

BACKGROUND

Central to palliative care is the early assessment and treatment of pain, whether physical, psychosocial, or spiritual. Nonverbal palliative care patients are at risk for inadequate pain assessment leading to prolonged suffering.

AIMS

The purpose of this project was to implement and evaluate an evidence-based pain assessment tool for nonverbal palliative care patients.

DESIGN

The Iowa Model Revised: Evidence-Based Practice to Promote Excellence in Healthcare and the Implementation Strategies for Evidence-Based Practice Guide provided the guiding frameworks.

SETTINGS

On a six-bed adult inpatient Palliative Care Unit (PCU).

PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS

Nonverbal palliative care patients.

METHODS

Evidence supported use of the Multidimensional Objective Pain Assessment Tool (MOPAT) for nonverbal patients receiving palliative care. During an eight-week pilot, nurses recorded pain assessments on a paper form and trended pain scores over a 24-hour period. Evaluation included knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors pre- and post-pilot and was subsequently used in a Precision Implementation Approach to promote adoption.

RESULTS

Nurses' attitudes toward palliative care pain assessment improved in all items on the evaluation tools. Pain was assessed using MOPAT for 74% of nonverbal palliative care patients and 88% of patients had linked pain interventions to MOPAT scores.

CONCLUSIONS

MOPAT is the only valid evidence-based pain assessment tool for nonverbal patients receiving palliative care. This project led to successful adoption of the MOPAT within the PCU.

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.

Validation of the Critical Care Pain Observational Tool in Palliative Care

PURPOSE

Pain assessment at the end of life remains a problem for patients who are unable to self-report their pain when transitioning across care settings. This study therefore tested the internal consistency and discriminant, concurrent, and convergent validity of the Critical-Care Pain Observational Tool (French version) when used with end-of-life patients in a palliative care setting.

DESIGN

This was a descriptive correlational study that used a repeated-measures within-subjects prospective design.

METHODS

The pain of 13 patients was assessed when at rest and during turning.

RESULTS

The internal consistency reliability coefficient alphas were .64 at rest and .70 during turning. Discriminant validity was shown by a decrease in the total Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool score. Concurrent validity was demonstrated by the association between the patients' self-report of pain and the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool score at rest (0.65, p < .016) and during turning (0.77, p = .002). Finally, the convergent validity between the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool score and the Algoplus scale score was demonstrated with a Spearman's correlation coefficient of 0.76 at rest and 0.84 during turning.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool can be used with end-of-life patients in French-speaking countries.

Vital signs fluctuations and their relationship with pain in the brain-injured adult critically ill - A repeated-measures descriptive-correlational study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the use of vital signs for pain detection in brain-injured patients in the intensive care unit.

DESIGN

A repeated-measures descriptive-correlational study.

SETTING

Two neurological intensive care units in Montréal, Canada. A total of 101 brain-injured patients were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

This study examined the fluctuations in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, heart and respiratory rates, and oxygen saturation in brain-injured critically ill patients before, during, and 15 minutes after turning and soft touch using a data collection computer. When possible, patients' pain self-reports were obtained using a 0-10 Faces Pain Thermometer.

RESULTS

The heart and respiratory rates were higher during turning than soft touch and higher during the procedure compared to prior (p < 0.05), but their fluctuation was modest. The systolic blood pressure increased during both turning and soft touch by 2 mmHg, but was 26.6 mmHg higher for those who reported pain versus no pain (Mann-Whitney = 25.00, p = 0.008, n = 28). A moderate correlation was observed between the systolic blood pressure (Spearman's rho = 0.617, p = 0.004, n = 24) and self-reported pain intensity during turning. No significant effects were observed for diastolic blood pressure and oxygen saturation.

CONCLUSION

Only increases in systolic blood pressure were positively associated with pain in this sample and replication studies with larger samples is needed.

Family Members' Experiences with Observing Pain Behaviors Using the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines support family members' participation in care, but little is known regarding their potential contribution to pain assessment using validated behavioral pain scales.

AIMS

This study aimed to describe family members' observations of pain behaviors with the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool and their evaluation of the tool and its use, and to understand their experience and perceptions of their potential role in pain management in the intensive care unit.

DESIGN

A mixed methods cross-sectional explanatory design was used.

SETTING

A medical-surgical intensive care unit in Canada.

PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS

Family members were eligible if they had a loved one admitted in the intensive care unit who was unable to self-report.

METHODS

Family members identified pain behaviors using the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool after a brief training, completed a self-administered questionnaire, and participated in a follow-up individual interview regarding their experience and perceived potential role in pain management when their loved one is unable to self-report.

RESULTS

Ten family members participated. A 15-minute training appeared sufficient for family members to be comfortable with observing pain behaviors included in the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool. The tool allowed them to confirm their observations of pain behaviors, to focus more on the patient, and to advocate for better pain management.

CONCLUSIONS

Future research is needed to explore the views of more family members and to compare their Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool scores to the ones of nurses' for interrater reliability testing.

Observational Pain Assessment Instruments for Use With Nonverbal Patients at the End-of-life: A Systematic Review

Purpose:

To review studies pertaining to the reliability and validity of observational pain assessment tools for use with nonverbal patients at the end-of-life, a field of research not documented by previous systematic reviews.

Methods:

Databases (PubMed, Embase, Epistemonikos, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL) were systematically searched for studies from study inception to February 21, 2016 (update in May 9, 2018). Two independent reviewers screened study titles, abstracts, and full texts according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Disagreements were resolved through consensus. Reviewers also extracted the psychometrics properties of studies of observational pain assessment instruments dedicated to a noncommunicative population in palliative care or at the end-of-life. A comprehensive quality assessment was conducted using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) to derive poor, fair, good or excellent ratings for the psychometric tests reported in each study.

Results:

Four studies linked to 4 different tools met the inclusion criteria. Study populations included dementia, palliative care and severe illness in the context of intensive care. All the studies included in this review obtained poor COSMIN ratings overall.

Conclusions:

At this point, it is impossible to recommend any of the tools evaluated given the low number and quality of the studies. Other analyses and studies need to be conducted to develop, adapt, or further validate observational pain instruments for the end-of-life population, regardless of the disease.