An audit on assessment and management of pain at the time of acute hospital admission in older people

Healthcare use among people with diabetes mellitus in Europe: a population-based cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the association of health determinants, lifestyle and socioeconomic variables on healthcare use in people with diabetes in Europe.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study was conducted using data from the European Health Interview Survey wave 2 (ie, secondary analysis).

SETTING

The sample included data from 25 European countries.

PARTICIPANTS

The sample included 16 270 patients with diabetes aged 15 years or older (49.1% men and 50.9% women).

RESULTS

The survey data showed that 58.2% of respondents had seen their primary care physician in the past month and 22.6% had been admitted to the hospital in the past year. Use of primary care was associated with being retired (prevalence ratio (PR) 1.13, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.19) and having very poor self-perceived health (PR 1.80, 95% CI 1.51 to 2.15), long-standing health problems (PR 1.14, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.24), high blood pressure (PR 1.06, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.10) and chronic back pain (PR 1.07, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.11). Hospital admission was associated with very poor self-perceived health (PR 3.03, 95% CI 2.14 to 4.31), accidents at home (PR 1.54, 95% CI 1.40 to 1.69), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (PR 1.34, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.47), high blood pressure (PR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.17), chronic back pain (PR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.98), moderate difficulty walking (PR 1.33, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.45) and severe difficulty walking (PR 1.67, 95% CI 1.51 to 1.85).

CONCLUSIONS

In the European diabetic population, the high cumulative incidences of primary care visits and hospital admissions are associated with labour status, alcohol consumption, self-perceived health, long-standing health problems, high blood pressure, chronic back pain, accidents at home, COPD and difficulty walking.

Special consideration for pain management in the older person

Pain is common among older people. However, it remains underrecognised and under-treated. A comprehensive assessment of pain involves identifying its cause, establishing its severity, determining its impact on the person experiencing it and reviewing the person's response to treatment. Addressing their pain requires a different approach compared to a younger person because there is usually concomitant frailty, multimorbidity, polypharmacy, sensory deficits and cognitive impairment. This review will summarise a comprehensive approach to pain management in the older person.

Pain and its associated factors in nursing home residents

This study examined the associated factors of pain in nursing home residents in Austria. A secondary data analysis was conducted with data collected in the 'Nursing Quality Measurement 2.0' study, which is conducted annually in Austrian healthcare institutions. Data from nursing homes from 2016 to 2019 were used. Of the 1,239 residents, 40.4% had experienced pain in the last 7 days and/or were experiencing pain at the time of the survey. The regression analysis showed that diseases of the musculoskeletal system, diseases of the skin and subcutaneous tissue, diseases of the circulatory system, pressure injuries, and a risk of malnutrition were statistically associated with pain (Χ2 (11) = 82,392, p < 0.000). Healthcare professionals working in nursing homes need to be aware of associated factors when treating pain in residents. This awareness is important because it enables professionals to identify high-risk groups and take appropriate steps.

Treating trauma more effectively: A review of psychosocial programming

IMPORTANCE

Traumatic events are the leading cause of life-altering disability in adults of working age. The management of patients with traumatic injury has substantially improved due to development of sophisticated trauma centers increasing survival after injury. Unlike the adoption of the trauma system framework, the same has not occurred with specialized trauma recovery services to include mental and social health needs. This literature review will discuss unique issues facing trauma survivors, some current recovery programs available, outcomes and benefits of these programs, and barriers that impair widespread incorporation.

OBSERVATIONS

Studies have shown that patients with traumatic injury experience reduction in quality of life and concurrent threats to mental health, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), alcohol use disorder, and recreational substance abuse. Patients with traumatic injury also have high recidivism rates, low pain management satisfaction, and poor engagement in care following injury. Screening efforts for PTSD, mental illness, and alcohol and substance abuse are more widely available interventions. Early coordinated efforts included dedicated multidisciplinary recovery teams. Recently, more methodical and organized programs, such as the Trauma Survivors Network, trauma collaborative care, Trauma Recovery Services, and Center of Trauma Survivorship, have been implemented.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The enrollment of patients with traumatic injury in novel programs to enhance recovery has led to heightened self-efficacy, better coping mechanisms, and increased use of mental health services. Additionally, trauma recovery services have been shown to reduce recidivism and have generated cost savings for hospital systems. While positive outcomes have been demonstrated, they are not consistently predictable. Barriers for widespread implementation include limitations of time, funding, and institutional support. This article describes models of successful programs initiated within some trauma centers, which may be duplicated to serve future trauma survivors.

Association between malnutrition risk and pain in older hospital patients

OBJECTIVE

To describe the prevalence of malnutrition risk and pain in older hospital patients and characterise the association between these two problems.

RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES

The study includes a secondary data analysis of data collected in two cross-sectional studies. Data collection was performed in 2017 and 2018 using a standardised and tested questionnaire. The study protocol was approved by an ethical committee.

RESULTS

Data from 3406 patients were analysed. Among the participants, 24.6% of the patients were at risk of malnutrition, and 59.6% of the patients reported feeling pain. A significantly higher number of patients with pain (26.4%) were at risk of malnutrition than patients without pain (22.1%). The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that patients with severe/very severe or unbearable pain were 1.439 times more likely to develop a risk of malnutrition than patients without pain. Patients with cancer or diseases of the digestive system were twice as likely to develop malnutrition than those without these diseases.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study show that older patients with severe pain are at higher risk of developing a risk of malnutrition than those without pain, although the study design (cross-sectional) does not imply causality. Therefore, special efforts should be made to assess pain in these patients to reduce the negative consequences of this pain, such as malnutrition.

Pain assessment and management: An audit of practice at a tertiary hospital

BACKGROUND

In spite of advances in techniques and analgesics for pain management, pain remains a major health problem. Regular assessment and reassessment of pain using guidelines with measurable goals is essential for effective pain management in surgical wards. Unfortunately, no such guidelines exist in South Africa. To implement appropriate precepts for the South African context, the current practice must be understood.

AIM

The aim of this article was to evaluate pain assessment and management of patients in two surgical wards at a tertiary hospital in South Africa.

SETTING

The study was conducted within the Western Cape Province of South Africa in a government-funded tertiary academic institution. The patients at this hospital are generally from the low-income strata and live in resource-poor communities.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, retrospective medical record audit was conducted. The folders of all 215 patients admitted to a specific orthopaedic trauma and urogynaecological ward of a tertiary hospital in South Africa over a span of 1 month were targeted for review. Medical folders that were not available or had missing notes were excluded. Variables evaluated included the number of pain assessments recorded, pain assessor, assessment tool and management plan.

RESULTS

A total of 168 folders were available for review. Nearly half of the patients had no documented pain assessment. The Verbal Rating Scale was the predominant tool used, and assessments were mostly conducted by the ward doctor. Pain interventions appeared to be primarily based on the professional knowledge of the practitioner and were not evidence-based.

CONCLUSION

Pain assessment and management was a problem in the two wards reviewed, which is similar to the findings from studies referenced in this text. Health professionals must be empowered to manage pain adequately. An assessment tool that integrates the biopsychosocial factors that influence the pain experience should be routinely employed by a multidisciplinary team to facilitate goal-directed therapy.

Pain in older adults with dementia : A survey across Europe on current practices, use of assessment tools, guidelines and policies

BACKGROUND

We aimed to explore the existing use of pain assessment tools and guidelines, and develop understanding of the practical considerations required to facilitate their use within the nursing home, hospital and community settings.

METHODS

A self-administered web-based survey was conducted with nurses, health and social care workers with an interest in the assessment of pain in older adults with cognitive impairment. The survey was distributed to participants in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, The Netherlands, Switzerland and United Kingdom.

RESULTS

Only a minority of staff reported use of (inter-)national or local standards or specific pain assessment tools in daily practice. A range of tools were reported as being used, which varied across country. While participants generally reported that these pain assessment tools were easy/very easy to use, many participants reported that they were difficult to interpret. Assessment is generally performed whilst providing nursing care. This was highlighted in 70-80% of all participating countries. While many of these tools rely on facial expression of pain, facial expressions were considered to be the least useful in comparison to other items. Furthermore findings showed that nurses employed in long-term care settings did not feel that they were educated enough in pain assessment and management.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that pain education is required across all countries surveyed. This should include a focus on guidelines and standards for assessment and subsequent management of pain. Findings suggest that clinical staff find interpreting facial expressions in relation to pain more difficult.

The assessment and management of pain in patients with dementia in hospital settings: a multi-case exploratory study from a decision making perspective

BACKGROUND

Pain is often poorly managed in people who have a dementia. Little is known about how this patient population is managed in hospital, with research to date focused mainly on care homes. This study aimed to investigate how pain is recognised, assessed and managed in patients with dementia in a range of acute hospital wards, to inform the development of a decision support tool to improve pain management for this group.

METHODS

A qualitative, multi-site exploratory case study. Data were collected in four hospitals in England and Scotland. Methods included non-participant observations, audits of patient records, semi-structured interviews with staff and carers, and analysis of hospital ward documents. Thematic analysis was performed through the lens of decision making theory.

RESULTS

Staff generally relied on patients' self-report of pain. For patients with dementia, however, communication difficulties experienced because of their condition, the organisational context, and time frames of staff interactions, hindered patients' ability to provide staff with information about their pain experience. This potentially undermined the trials of medications used to provide pain relief to each patient and assessments of their responses to these treatments. Furthermore, given the multidisciplinary environment, a patient's communication about their pain involved several members of staff, each having to make sense of the patient's pain as in an 'overall picture'. Information about patients' pain, elicited in different ways, at different times and by different health care staff, was fragmented in paper-based documentation. Re-assembling the pieces to form a 'patient specific picture of the pain' required collective staff memory, 'mental computation' and time.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a need for an efficient method of eliciting and centralizing all pain-related information for patients with dementia, which is distributed in time and between personnel. Such a method should give an overall picture of a patient's pain which is rapidly accessible to all involved in their care. This would provide a much-needed basis for making decisions to support the effective management of the pain of older people with dementia in hospital.

Mandatory documentation of pain in the emergency department increases analgesic administration but does not improve patients' satisfaction of pain management

BACKGROUND

Pain is one of the most common symptoms treated in emergency department (ED). Pain may cause suffering and disability for the patient. Inadequate pain management may be associated with increased risk of complications such as sleep disturbance, delirium and depression. Previous studies conclude that pain management in ED is insufficient and inadequate. Yet, little is known about patients' own experience regarding pain management in ED.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore the satisfaction of pain management in patients having acute musculoskeletal injuries before and after implementation of mandatory documentation regarding pain assessment in the ED.

METHOD

An observational pre-post intervention study design was used. The study was conducted on patients having acute musculoskeletal injuries such as soft tissue injury, back pain or wrist/arm/leg/foot fractures in a 24-h adult (>15 years) ED at a public urban teaching hospital in Stockholm, Sweden. Data was collected by an interview based on a questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 160 patients answered the questionnaire. In the pre- (n=80) and post-intervention (n=80) groups, 91/95% experienced pain in the ED. A significant difference (p<0.003) was found during the post-intervention period, with more patients receiving analgesics compared to the pre-intervention group. A significant decline (p<0.03) in patients' own reported pain intensity at discharge was found between the groups. Patients' reported satisfaction on pain management in the ED increased in the post-intervention group, but the difference was not statistically significantly.

CONCLUSION

Patients' satisfaction with pain management increased, but not statistically significantly. However, both percentages of patients receiving analgesic drugs increased and pain intensity decrease at discharge were statistically significant after the intervention that made nurses obliged to register pain.

IMPLICATION

According to the findings of this study, mandatory pain documentation facilitates pain management in the ED, but there is still room for improvement. Additional actions are needed to improve patients' satisfaction on pain management in the ED. Mandatory pain documentation in combination with person-centred care could be a way of improving patients' satisfaction on pain management. Effective pain management is an important quality measure, and should be focused on in acute care in the ED. By routinely asking patients to report the pain intensity at discharge, the ED personnel can have direct feedback about the factual pain management. RNs may also be encouraged to use intravenous analgesics in higher extent when the patients have very severe pain.

[Pain assessment in routine care : A prospective observational study in an orthopedic unit]

INTRODUCTION

Although well-established guidelines give advice on how to use analgesics, measure pain, and organize pain treatment, many patients still suffer from avoidable severe pain. We assume one reason for this is that pain is inadequately addressed in routine patient contacts. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the extent to which pain was addressed during patient contacts in routine orthopedic care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a prospective observational study in an orthopedic unit of a university hospital, we invited physicians and nurses during their routine patient contacts to be observed by independent, trained monitors. The monitors systematically assessed all pain-related aspects, which were analyzed descriptively afterwards.

RESULTS

The monitors documented 572 physician-patient contacts with 7 physicians and 108 patients and 578 nurse-patient contacts with 12 nurses and 102 patients. Physicians and nurses asked their patients about pain in 20 and 16 % of the patient contacts, respectively. While in physician-patient contacts, patients most frequently addressed their current pain situation (in 35 % of contacts), in nurse-patient contacts, patients most frequently addressed their need for analgesics (52 %). Patients rated their pain intensity in 16 % of physician-patient contacts vs. 17 % of nurse-patient contacts.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a comprehensive external monitoring procedure, we found that systematic pain assessment was not optimally standardized and implemented for systematic, individualized pain therapy by physicians or nurses in our routine care setting.