Validation of critical care pain observation tool in patients hospitalized in surgical wards

Prevalence of Delirium After Abdominal Surgery and Association With Ketamine: A Retrospective, Propensity-Matched Cohort Study

IMPORTANCE

Delirium is a common postoperative complication for older patients in the ICU. Ketamine, used primarily as an analgesic, has been thought to prevent delirium.

OBJECTIVE

Determine the prevalence and association of delirium with low-dose ketamine use in ICU patients after abdominal surgery.

DESIGN

Single-center, retrospective, propensity-matched cohort study.

SETTING

Eight hospital academic medical center.

PATIENTS

Cohort comprising 1836 patients admitted to the ICU after abdominal surgery between June 23, 2018 and September 1, 2022.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Propensity score matching (PSM) with a 3:1 ratio between no-ketamine use and ketamine use was performed through a greedy algorithm (caliper of 0.005). Outcomes of interest included: delirium (assessed by Confusion Assessment Method-ICU), mean pain score (Numeric Pain Scale or Critical Care Pain Observation Tool score as available), mean opioid consumption (morphine milligram equivalents), length of stay (d), and mortality.

RESULTS

Prevalence of delirium was 47.71% (95% CI, 45.41-50.03%) in the cohort. Of 1836 patients, 120 (6.54%) used low-dose ketamine infusion. After PSM, the prevalence of delirium was 56.02% (95% CI, 51.05-60.91%) in all abdominal surgery patients. The ketamine group had 41% less odds of delirium (odds ratio [OR] = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.37-0.94; p = 0.026) than patients with no-ketamine use. Patients with ketamine use had higher mean pain scores (3.57 ± 2.86 vs. 2.21 ± 2.09, p < 0.001). In the subgroup analysis, patients in the ketamine-use group 60 years old or younger had 64% less odds of delirium (OR = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.13-0.95; p = 0.039). The mean pain scores were higher in the ketamine group for patients 60 years old or older. There was no significant difference in mortality and opioid consumption.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Low-dose ketamine infusion was associated with lower prevalence of delirium in ICU patients following abdominal surgery. Prospective studies should further evaluate ketamine use and delirium.

A Comparative Study of the Diagnostic Value of the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool and the Behavioral Pain Scale for Pain Assessment among Unconscious Patients

Background

Pain assessment in unconscious patients is a major challenge for healthcare providers. This study aims to compare the diagnostic value of the critical-care pain observation tool (CPOT) and the behavioral pain scale (BPS) for pain assessment among unconscious patients.

Materials and methods

This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2019. Forty-five unconscious patients were selected randomly from four general intensive care units (ICUs) in the north of Iran. The discriminant validity of CPOT and BPS were evaluated for pain during a nociceptive and a nonnociceptive procedure. For reliability assessment, interrater agreement was obtained using Lin's concordance correlation coefficient and weighted kappa coefficient.

Results

Patients who had been hospitalized in ICU due to surgery or trauma (57.70%) or medical problems (42.30%) were studied. During the nociceptive procedure, the mean scores of CPOT and BPS and all their dimensions, except for the compliance with ventilator dimension, were significantly greater than the nonnociceptive procedure (p <0.05) although the effect size of both instruments was small (0.32 vs 0.18). The Lin's concordance correlation coefficient in nonnociceptive and nociceptive procedures was respectively 0.67 and 0.62 for CPOT and 0.74 and 0.88 for BPS.

Conclusion

CPOT and BPS have acceptable discriminant validity in differentiating nonnociceptive and nociceptive procedural pain although the effect size of CPOT is larger than that of BPS. Although both instruments have low reliability, the reliability of BPS is better.

How to cite this article

Nazari R, Froelicher ES, Nia HS, Hajihosseini F, Mousazadeh N. Diagnostic Values of the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool and the Behavioral Pain Scale for Pain Assessment among Unconscious Patients: A Comparative Study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(4):472–476.

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.

Continuing nursing education: use of observational pain assessment tool for diagnosis and management of pain in critically ill patients following training through a social networking app versus lectures

BACKGROUND

Nursing staff training in using observational pain assessment tools is highly important to improve the assessment of pain. The present study was conducted to examine the effect of two different training methods (lectures vs. a social networking app) on the diagnosis and management of pain in mechanically-ventilated patients.

METHODS

This quasi-experimental study was conducted on 70 nurses working in two Intensive Care Units (ICU) in Mashhad, Iran. The nurses were trained in the application of observational pain assessment tools by lectures or through a social networking app. Before and after the intervention, the nurses' performance was evaluated in both groups using a checklist based on Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT).

RESULTS

In the pre-intervention phase, the nurses' performance scores in the domains of pain diagnosis and pain management were not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05). Following the intervention, the mean score of pain diagnosis was 82 ± 19 in the lecture group and 97 ± 8 in the social networking app group (P < 0.01), and the mean pain management scores were 30 ± 17 and 90 ± 18 (P < 0.01), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that learning through a social networking app led to improved diagnosis and management of pain in mechanically-ventilated patients when compared with lectures. Training through social networking applications can therefore be considered as a feasible instructional method for developing nurses' pain management skills.

Evaluation of Observational and Behavioural Pain Assessment Tools in Nonverbal Intubated Critically Adult Patients after Open - Heart Surgery: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Over 70% of patients hospitalised in an intensive care unit (ICU) often experience moderate to severe pain due to pre-existing diseases, trauma, surgery, aggressive procedures, and routine ICU care. Many patients hospitalised in ICU are not able to speak and express their pain due to various causes, including mechanical ventilation, reduced consciousness, and administration of sedative drugs. Therefore, the use of observational and behavioural pain tools is recommended in this group of patients given their inability to express pain.

AIM

To examine the existing observational and behavioural tools for assessment of in Nonverbal Intubated Critically Adult Patients after Open-Heart Surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review of available observational and behavioural tools for assessment of pain was undertaken using the COSMIN checklist. A literature search was conducted using the following databases: Ovid, Science Direct, Scopus, PubMed, and CINHAL databases, Google Scholar search engine as well as Persian resources Sid, Magiran, Iran doc, and IranMedex up to the end of 2017 were reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 47 studies that had examined five tools used in intensive care units after cardiac surgery in patients under mechanical ventilation were reviewed. Each of the five tools included behavioural and observational items, and only one tool had physiological items. All the tools had been evaluated regarding validity and reliability. In the three tools, sensitivity, specificity, responsiveness, and satisfaction were considered.

CONCLUSION

Based on available evidence and investigations, CPOT and BPS tools have good validity and reliability to be used in pain assessment in Nonverbal Intubated Critically Adult Patients after Open-Heart Surgery. The NVPS tool requires more studies to be further confirmed before the assessment of pain in this group of patients.

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.

Validation of Two Pain Assessment Tools Using a Standardized Nociceptive Stimulation in Critically Ill Adults

CONTEXT

The Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) or the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) are recommended in practice guidelines for pain assessment in critically ill adults unable to self-report. However, their use in another language requires cultural adaptation and validation testing.

OBJECTIVES

Cross-cultural adaptation of the CPOT and BPS English versions into Brazilian Portuguese, and their validation by comparing behavioral scores during rest, standardized nociceptive stimulation by pressure algometry (SNSPA), and turning were completed. In addition, we explored clinical variables that could predict the CPOT and BPS scores.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted with 168 medical-surgical critically ill adults unable to self-report in the intensive care unit. Two nurses were trained to use the CPOT and BPS Brazilian Portuguese versions at the following assessments: 1) baseline at rest, 2) after SNSPA with a pressure of 14 kgf/cm², 3) during turning, and 4) 15 minutes after turning.

RESULTS

Inter-rater reliability of nurses' CPOT and BPS scores was supported by high weighted kappa >0.7. Discriminative validation was supported with higher CPOT and BPS scores during SNSPA or turning in comparison to baseline (P < 0.001). The Glasgow Coma Scale score was the only variable that predicted CPOT and BPS scores with explained variance of 44.5% and 55.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The use of the Brazilian CPOT and BPS versions showed good reliability and validity in critically ill adults unable to self-report. A standardized procedure, the SNSPA, was used for the first time in the validation process of these tools and helped us improve the validation process.