Pain management in trauma: A review study

Opioid and non-opioid analgesic regimens after fracture and risk of serious opioid-related events

Background

Non-opioid analgesics are prescribed in combination with opioids among patients with long bone fracture to reduce opioid prescribing needs, yet evidence is limited on whether they reduce the risk of serious opioid-related events (SOREs). We compared the risk of SOREs among hospitalized patients with long bone fracture discharged with filled opioid prescriptions, with and without non-opioid analgesics.

Design

We identified a retrospective cohort of analgesic-naïve adult patients with a long bone fracture hospitalization using the Merative MarketScan Commercial Database (2013-2020). The exposure was opioid and non-opioid analgesic (gabapentinoids, muscle relaxants, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen) prescriptions filled in the 3 days before through 42 days after discharge. The outcome was the development of new persistent opioid use or opioid use disorder during follow-up (day 43 through day 408 after discharge). We used Cox proportional hazards regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting with overlap trimming to compare outcomes among those that filled an opioid and a non-opioid analgesic to those that filled only an opioid analgesic. In secondary analyses, we used separate models to compare those that filled a prescription for each specific non-opioid analgesic type with opioids to those that filled only opioids.

Results

Of 29 489 patients, most filled an opioid prescription alone (58.4%) or an opioid and non-opioid (22.0%). In the weighted proportional hazards regression model accounting for relevant covariates and total MME, filling both a non-opioid analgesic and an opioid analgesic was associated with 1.63 times increased risk of SOREs compared with filling an opioid analgesic only (95% CI 1.41 to 1.89). Filling a gabapentin prescription in combination with an opioid was associated with an increased risk of SOREs compared with those that filled an opioid only (adjusted HR: 1.84 (95% CI1.48 to 2.27)).

Conclusions

Filling a non-opioid analgesic in combination with an opioid was associated with an increased risk of SOREs after long bone fracture.

Level of evidence

Level III, prognostic/epidemiological.

Study type

Retrospective cohort study.

Factors influencing nurses' pain assessment and management of road traffic casualties: a qualitative study at a military hospital in Ghana

BACKGROUND

Evidence shows that patients who visit the surgical and trauma emergency units may be discharged with untreated or increased pain levels. This study explored nurses' pain assessment and management approaches at a trauma-surgical emergency unit in Ghana.

METHODS

Seventeen nurses who work in the trauma department participated in this qualitative exploratory descriptive study. In-depth individual interviews were conducted, and the thematic analysis was utilized to identify emerging themes and subthemes.

RESULTS

Three main themes were identified: patient pain indicators, pain management, and institutional factors influencing pain management. The study revealed that nurses rely on verbal expressions, non-verbal cues, physiological changes, and the severity of pain communicated. The findings highlighted staff shortage, inadequate resources, and lack of standardized guidelines as factors affecting pain and management.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the study offers critical new perspectives on nurses' experiences regarding pain related issues at the trauma-surgical emergency units, its small sample size limited its generalizability.

Outcomes of Combined Opioids and Benzodiazepines Consumption in Elderly Trauma: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Acute substance intoxication is associated with traumatic injury and worse hospital outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between simultaneous opioids and benzodiazepines (OB) use and hospital outcomes in elderly trauma patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis using the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS-TQIP) 2017 database. We included trauma patients (age ≥ 65 years) examined by urine toxicology within 24 hours of presentation. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital and ICU lengths of stay (HLOS AND ICULOS), in-hospital complications (eg, ventilator-associated pneumonia), unplanned intubation, and duration of mechanical ventilation. Patients were stratified being both positive for opioids and benzodiazepines (OB+) or not (OB-) based on having positive or negative drug screen for both drugs, respectively. A 1:1 propensity score matching was performed controlling for demographics (eg, age and sex), comorbidities (eg, alcoholism), and injury characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 77,311 tested patients, 849 OB+ were matched to OB- patients. Compared to OB- group, OB+ patients were more likely to have unplanned intubation (26 [3.1%] vs 8 [0.9%], P = 0.002) and had prolonged HLOS (≥2 days: 683 [84.0%] vs 625 [77.8%], P = 0.002). There were no differences in all other outcomes (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The OB intake is associated with higher incidence of unplanned intubation and longer HLOS in elderly trauma patients. Early identification of elderly trauma patient with OB+ can help provide necessary pharmacologic and behavioral interventions to treat their substance use and potentially improve outcomes.

Analgesia use in trauma patients at a university teaching hospital in Kigali, Rwanda

Introduction

While trends in analgesia have been identified in high-income countries, little research exists regarding analgesia administration in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). This study evaluates analgesia administration and clinical characteristics among patients seeking emergency injury care at University Teaching Hospital-Kigali in Kigali, Rwanda.

Methods

This retrospective, cross-sectional study utilized a random sample of emergency center (EC) cases accrued between July 2015 and June 2016. Data was extracted from the medical record for patients who had an injury and were ≥ 15 years of age. Injury-related EC visits were identified by presenting complaint or final discharge diagnosis. Sociodemographic information, injury mechanism and type, and analgesic medications ordered and administered were analyzed.

Results

Of the 3,609 random cases, 1,329 met eligibility and were analyzed. The study population was predominantly male (72%) with a median age of 32 years and range between 15 and 81 years. In the studied sample, 728 (54.8%) were treated with analgesia in the EC. In unadjusted logistic regression, only age was not a significant predictor of receiving pain medication and was excluded from the adjusted analysis. In the adjusted model, all predictors remained significant, with being male, having at least one severe injury, and road traffic accident (RTA) as injury mechanism being significant predictors of analgesia administration.

Conclusion

In the study setting of injured patients in Rwanda, being male, involved in RTA or having more than one serious injury was associated with higher odds of receiving pain medication. Approximately half of the patients with traumatic injuries received pain medications, predominantly opioids with no factors predicting whether a patient would receive opioids versus other medications. Further research on implementation of pain guidelines and drug shortages is warranted to improve pain management for injured patients in the LMIC setting.

Efficacy of opioids for traumatic pain in the emergency department: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

Aim: To systematically assess and rank the efficacy of opioid medications for traumatic pain in the emergency department in terms of pain relief, adverse events and rescue analgesia. Methods: Four databases were systematically searched until 26 September 2022: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Outcomes were pain relief, adverse events (dizziness, hypotension, pruritus, sedation), and rescue analgesia. For each outcome, network plots were drawn to exhibit direct and indirect comparisons, and rank probabilities were utilized to rank the efficacy of different opioids. Results: Twenty studies of 3,040 patients were eligible for this network meta-analysis. According to the rank probabilities, the top three analgesic medications for pain relief may be sufentanil (78.29% probability of ranking first), buprenorphine (48.54% probability of ranking second) and fentanyl (53.25% probability of ranking third); buprenorphine (31.20%), fentanyl (20.14%) and sufentanil (21.55%) were least likely to cause dizziness; the top three analgesic medications which were least likely to cause hypotension were buprenorphine (81.64%), morphine (45.02%) and sufentanil (17.27%); butorphanol (40.56%), morphine (41.11%) and fentanyl (14.63%) were least likely to cause pruritus; the top three medications which were least likely to cause sedation were hydrocodone + acetaminophen (97.92%), morphine (61.85%) and butorphanol (55.24%); patients who received oxycodone (83.64%), butorphanol (38.31%) and fentanyl (25.91%) were least likely to need rescue analgesia in sequence. Conclusion: Sufentanil, buprenorphine and fentanyl may be superior to other opioid medications in terms of pain relief and the incidence of dizziness, hypotension and pruritus, which might be selected as opioid analgesics for traumatic pain in the emergency setting.

Procedural sedation and analgesia versus nerve blocks for reduction of fractures and dislocations in the emergency department: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) and peripheral nerve blocks (NBs) are techniques to manage pain and facilitate reduction of dislocated joints or fractures. However, it is unclear if either approach provides any distinct advantage in the emergency department (ED). The aim of this systematic review is to compare these 2 techniques on pain scores, adverse events, patient satisfaction, and length of stay (LOS) in the ED.

Methods

We performed an electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, and references were hand-searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PSA with NBs for orthopedic reductions in the ED were included. Outcomes of interest included pain scores, adverse events, patient satisfaction, and LOS in the ED. A total of 2 reviewers independently screened abstracts and extracted data into a standardized form. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to evaluate study quality. The Grading of Recommendation Assessment Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess the certainty and strength of the evidence. Data on pain scores were pooled using a random-effects model and are reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

A total of 6 RCTs (n = 256) were included in a qualitative review, and 4 RCTs (n = 101) were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in pain scores between the PSA and NB groups (P = 0.47; SMD, 0.45; 95% CI, -0.78 to 1.69; I² = 0.94). There were less adverse events in the NB group (0%-3.3%) compared with the PSA group (0%-20%; n = 256). LOS times were consistently shorter in the NB group (n = 215). Patient satisfaction was comparable in both groups (n = 196).

Conclusion

Based on the available evidence, NBs performed by emergency physicians are as effective as PSA in managing pain during orthopedic reductions in the ED. NBs are associated with fewer adverse events and shorter LOS in the ED. The quality of evidence is low.

Pain Management in a Prehospital Emergency Setting: A Retrospective Observational Study

Purpose

Acute pain is a prevalent symptomatology in prehospital emergency care. Although inadequate assessment and treatment of acute pain are associated with various complications, about 43% of adults suffering from pain are undertreated. This phenomenon is poorly studied, and limited data are available in the literature. The objective was to investigate the pain management in a prehospital emergency health-care setting, verifying pain assessment, pharmacological treatment adherence and the effectiveness of pain relief therapy.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective observational study was conducted in a sample including all adults treated by the professionals of nurse-staffed ambulances and medical cars in an Italian Emergency Medical Services (EMS) from 1 January 2019 to 31 May 2019. We collected both demographic information and Numeric Rating Scale scores, which evaluated presence and intensity of pain, from the EMS paper forms. All analyses were performed using SPSS, version 27.

Results

The study sample was composed of 629 people: 310 males (49%) and 319 females (51%), with an average age of 64.2±22 years (range 18-108). Pain information was collected in 75.5% (n = 475) of our sample; among them 222 patients (46.7%) suffered from pain. We recorded that 79.7% (n = 177) of the subjects with pain received no pharmacological treatment, and in almost all of the treated cases they did not adhere to the analgesia algorithm in use. Among those who were pharmacologically treated, pain statistically significantly decreased in intensity, from before to after, in both emergency vehicles (nurse-staffed ambulances pre m = 8.36±0.9 vs post m = 4.18±2.2, p<0.001; medical cars pre m = 7.25±1.7 vs post m = 3.50±2.6, p<0.001). Subsequently, pain was only re-ascertained in 24.3% of subjects.

Conclusion

Our findings confirm that pain is a prevalent symptom in prehospital patients, especially in the younger age range, but that it remains an underrecognized, underestimated, and undertreated symptom with the risk of causing worse health outcomes.

[Treatment of trauma-related vertebral body fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine with orthotic devices : A review]

BACKGROUND

Trauma-related fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine occur after exposure to high kinetic energy. To assign patients to the correct kind of treatment the AO spine classification is used.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to describe the role of orthotic devices in the treatment of thoracic and lumbar fractures in the nondegenerative spine.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A review of the literature was carried out according to the PRISMA protocol (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) in PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane and Google.Scholar. A total of 118 potentially important publications were found and 16 studies with a prospective study design could be included in this analysis. RoB 2 (Cochrane Risk of Bias tool in the second Version) in the case of randomized studies and the ROBINS‑I (Risk Of Bias In Nonrandomised Studies of Interventions) for nonrandomized studies were used to assess publication quality. The level of evidence was determined according to AHCPR (Agency for Health Care Policy and Research).

RESULTS

In the case of fractures (AO types A0-A3) without degenerative changes in the bone structure of the thoracic and lumbar spine without indications for operative procedure, conservative treatment with analgesia, physiotherapy and early mobilization is recommended and orthotic treatment is not superior. Surgical treatment, even in cases where conservative treatment was possible, led to improved functionality and pain sensation faster but there were no differences in the long-term results. Assessing the neurological functional deficit, the functional success of the treatment and the kyphosis angle were measured in different ways, reducing the extent of comparability. Although mainly a level of evidence Ib-IIa could be assigned, nearly all included studies had a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

In individual cases treatment with an orthotic device could be a helpful add-on in conservative treatment of fractures in the thoracic and lumbar spine. A treatment with orthotic devices alone cannot be recommended in these cases.

Pharmacological Treatment for Acute Traumatic Musculoskeletal Pain in Athletes

Pain management is a crucial issue for athletes who train and compete at the highest performance levels. There are still evidence gaps for the use of analgesics for sports injuries despite the growing interest in training and competition settings. However, high-quality research is needed to determine the most appropriate and optimal timing and formulations in non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug and opioid management, particularly given the strictness of anti-doping regulations. Indeed, the role of pharmacological therapy in reducing acute traumatic pain in athletes should still be addressed to minimize the timing of return to sport. Therefore, the aim of this comprehensive review was to summarize the current evidence about pain management in the setting of acute injury in elite athletes, providing the most informed strategy for pain relief and performance recovery.

Approaching acute pain in emergency settings; European Society for Emergency Medicine (EUSEM) guidelines-part 2: management and recommendations

BACKGROUND

In Europe, healthcare systems and education, as well as the clinical care and health outcomes of patients, varies across countries. Likewise, the management of acute events for patients also differs, dependent on the emergency care setting, e.g. pre-hospital or emergency department. There are various barriers to adequate pain management and factors common to both settings including lack of knowledge and training, reluctance to give opioids, and concerns about drug-seeking behaviour or abuse. There is no single current standard of care for the treatment of pain in an emergency, with management based on severity of pain, injury and local protocols. Changing practices, attitudes and behaviour can be difficult, and improvements and interventions should be developed with barriers to pain management and the needs of the individual emergency setting in mind.

METHODS

With these principles at the forefront, The European Society for Emergency Medicine (EUSEM) launched a programme-the European Pain Initiative (EPI)-with the aim of providing information, advice, and guidance on acute pain management in emergency settings.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

This article provides treatment recommendations from recently developed guidelines, based on a review of the literature, current practice across Europe and the clinical expertise of the EPI advisors. The recommendations have been developed, evaluated, and refined for both adults and children (aged ≥ 1 year, ≤ 15 years), with the assumption of timely pain assessment and reassessment and the possibility to implement analgesia. To provide flexibility for use across Europe, options are provided for selection of appropriate pharmacological treatment.

Approaching acute pain in emergency settings: European Society for Emergency Medicine (EUSEM) guidelines-part 1: assessment

Pain management is a vital component of patient care, particularly in the emergency setting. Pain can hinder the opportunities to treat and manage pain-causing conditions and remains one of the primary reasons patients seek emergency medical care, yet despite this, pain often remains under-acknowledged, under-assessed and undertreated. Despite the importance of effective management of acute pain, there are currently no well-defined emergency medicine guidelines at a European level to support healthcare professionals in achieving this goal. The European Society for Emergency Medicine (EUSEM) identified this as a significant unmet requirement, for improving day-to-day patient management and for providing guidance to trainees and non-emergency medicine physicians. Under the auspices of EUSEM, a programme-the European Pain Initiative-was launched with the aim of providing information, advice and guidance on pain management in pre-hospital and emergency department settings. Search terms were developed to search MEDLINE, Cochrane database, Google Scholar and EMBASE online databases to return English language articles published in the last 10 years. A working package of reference materials was evaluated against inclusion and exclusion criteria and levels of evidence ascribed. A short survey was developed by the European Pain Initiative Steering Committee for completion by EUSEM members to evaluate actual clinical practice. A working document of > 800 publications was identified for further review and evaluation against agreed criteria. Some further publications were included by the Steering Committee to explore older literature for long-established analgesics, or newly emergent literature that was considered important for inclusion but was identified as the guideline development was underway. This article provides the methodology used to inform the guidelines, including survey results of EUSEM members on assessment and treatment of acute pain. A companion manuscript in this issue presents an evidence-based review and recommendations for individualised evaluation of acute pain in patients in emergency settings.

Effects of Topical Sesame Oil Extracted from Tahini (Ardeh) on Pain Severity in Trauma Patients: A Randomized Double-Blinded Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

Objective

To investigate the effects of sesame oil extracted from tahini (Ardeh) on pain severity in patients with upper or lower limbs trauma.

Methods

This double-blinded randomized clinical trial study was conducted on 120 patients with upper or lower trauma in Shahid Rajaee Hospital, Shiraz, Iran, from May the 1^st through November 30^th, 2016. The patients were randomly assigned to two groups using block randomization. The intervention group received topical sesame oil extracted from tahini (Ardeh) and the placebo group received cooking oil. Pain severity, pain sensitivity and heaviness of painful site were assessed.

Results

Overall, we included 90 patients with traumatic limb injuries in this study who were randomized to two study groups. The mean age of the patients was 28.3 ± 6.8 (ranging from 25 to 35) years and there were 63 (70%) men and 27 (30%) women among the patients. In the sesame oil group, the mean changes in the pain severity (-1.53 ± 0.57, P<0.001), pain sensitivity (-1.45 ± 0.64, P<0.001) and heaviness of painful site (-1.56 ± 0.68, P<0.001) were significantly lower when compared to the placebo group in the second day of the intervention. None of the patients experience adverse drug effects.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that the topical use of sesame oil extracted from Tahini has a pain reliever effect on the skin after bruising and it helps prevent skin discoloration in patients with traumatic injuries of limbs.

Prehospital acute traumatic pain assessment and management practices in the Western Cape, South Africa: a retrospective review

BACKGROUND

Trauma is a common aetiology of acute pain in the emergency setting, and traumatic injuries have been recognised as a global public health crisis leading to numerous deaths and disabilities. This study aimed to identify the prevalence of acute pain among high acuity trauma patients presenting to a public sector emergency medical service and to describe prehospital acute traumatic pain assessment and management practices amongst emergency care providers in the Western Cape Province, South Africa.

METHODS

A retrospective review of electronic patient care reports of trauma patients treated by the South African Western Cape Emergency Medical Services between January 1 and December 31, 2017 was conducted. Stratified random sampling was utilised to select 2401 trauma patients out of 24,575 that met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 2401 patients reviewed, 435 (18.1%) had a pain score recorded, of which 423 (97.2%) were experiencing pain. An additional 8.1% (n = 194) of patients had pain or tenderness mentioned in the working diagnosis but no pain score noted. Eighty-one (18.6%) patients experienced mild pain, 175 (40.2%) moderate pain and 167 (38.2%) severe pain. No association was found between a pain score recorded and age group (≤ 14 versus > 14 years) (p = 0.649) or gender (p = 0.139). Only 7.6% of patients with moderate-to-severe pain and 2.8% of all trauma patients received any form of analgesic medication. No association was found between the administration of analgesia and age group (≤ 14 versus > 14 years) (p = 0.151) or gender (p = 0.054). Patients were more likely to receive analgesia if they had a pain score recorded (p < 0.001), were managed by advanced life support practitioners (p < 0.001) or had severe pain (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Acute trauma pain assessment and management practices in this prehospital cohort are less well established than reported elsewhere and whether this reflects emergency care training, institutional culture, scopes of practice or analgesic resources, requires further research. Emergency medical services need to monitor and promote quality pain care, enhance pain education and ensure that all levels of emergency care providers have access to analgesic medication approved for prehospital use. Clear and rational guidelines would enable better pain management by all cadres of providers, for all levels of pain.

Pain is vital in resuscitation in trauma

Implementation of the ATLS algorithm has remarkably improved the resuscitation of trauma patients and has significantly contributed to the systematic management of multi-trauma patients. However, pain remains the most prevalent complaint in trauma patients, and can induce severe complications, further deterioration of health, and death of the patient. Providing appropriate and timely pain management to these patients prompts early healing, reduces stress response, shortens hospital Length of Stay (LOS), diminishes chronic pain, and ultimately reduces morbidity and mortality. Pain has been proposed to be evaluated as the fifth vital sign and be recorded in the vital sign charts in order to emphasize the importance of pain on short- and long-term outcomes of the patients. However, although the quality of pain treatment seems to be improving we believe that pain has been underestimated in trauma. This article aims to provide evidence for the importance of pain in trauma, to support its management in the emergency setting and the acute phase of patients’ resuscitation, and to emphasize on the necessity to introduce the letter P (pain) in the ATLS alphabet.

Choice of Analgesia in Patients with Critical Skeletal Trauma

Introduction

The adequate management of thoracic trauma requires a systematic approach including pain control, respiratory therapy, and mobility achieved by surgical fixation. Failure to achieve pain control prolongs hospital stay. There are several options for achieving analgesia including epidural catheters, intravenous narcotics, intercostal, paravertebral or interpleural blocks, oral opioids, or simply a combination of the aforementioned interventions. In this study, we aim to compare the efficacy of thoracic epidural analgesia with systemic analgesia in patients with polytrauma.

Methods

This prospective study was conducted in the intensive care unit (ICU) of District Headquarters Hospital in Dera Ghazi Khan, Pakistan. Patients of age ≥18 years with skeletal trauma - rib fractures, limb fractures, and pelvic fractures - were included in the study. Group A patients were given epidural - bupivacaine and tramadol. Group B patients were given systemic analgesia with intravenous opioids. The severity of pain was assessed on the visual analogue scale (VAS) at time 0, 24 hours, and 48 hours. Data was entered and analysis was performed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 22.0.

Results

At 24 hours and 48 hours interval, group A showed a lower mean VAS score than group B (p = 0.74; p = 0.03). Group A required lesser mean doses of additional short-acting analgesics than group B (4.87 ± 1.06 vs. 6.77 ± 1.44; p < 0.0001). In Group A, 94% were discharged and the mortality rate was 6%; in group B, 86% were discharged and the mortality rate was 14% (p = 0.21).

Conclusion

Epidural analgesia provides better pain relief and requires fewer short-acting supplementing analgesics as compared to systemic analgesia in patients with multi-trauma.

A Review of the Burden of Trauma Pain in Emergency Settings in Europe

Trauma pain represents a large proportion of admissions to emergency departments across Europe. There is currently an unmet need in the treatment of trauma pain extending throughout the patient journey in emergency settings. This review aims to explore these unmet needs and describe barriers to the delivery of effective analgesia for trauma pain in emergency settings. A comprehensive, qualitative review of the literature was conducted using a structured search strategy (Medline, Embase and Evidence Based Medicine Reviews) along with additional Internet-based sources to identify relevant human studies published in the prior 11 years (January 2006-December 2017). From a total of 4325 publications identified, 31 were selected for inclusion based on defined criteria. Numerous barriers to the effective treatment of trauma pain in emergency settings were identified, which may be broadly defined as arising from a lack of effective pain management pan-European and national guidelines, delayed or absent pain assessment, an aversion to opioid analgesia and a delay in the administration of analgesia. Several commonly used analgesics also present limitations in the treatment of trauma pain due to the routes of administration, adverse side effect profiles, pharmacokinetic properties and suitability for use in pre-hospital settings. These combined barriers lead to the inadequate and ineffective treatment of trauma pain for patients. An unmet need therefore exists for novel forms of analgesia, wider spread use of available analgesic agents which overcome some limitations associated with several treatment options, and the development of protocols for pain management which include patient assessment of pain.Funding: Mundipharma International Ltd.

Prospective analysis of pain and pain management in an emergency department

.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE WORK

The aim of pain management in the Emergency Department (ED) is to temporarily optimize patient quality of life by reducing acute discomfort. The goals of this study were to evaluate the intensity and location of pain experienced by patients in the ED, the time to analgesia administration in the ED, and the patient's satisfaction so to identify potential useful interventions to improve pain management.

METHODS

We prospectively collected data on the intensity of pain experienced by 137 patients during their ED stays using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Patients were further stratified by pain intensity according to three categories, and by cause of pain.

RESULTS

NRS pain measurements were higher than VAS measurements. Patients who took pain medication within a few hours before their ED visit had a higher mean VAS score at arrival in comparison to patients who did not. Patients treated with pain medications, compared to the non-treated, had more pain at arrival; abdominal pain was treated earlier than non-abdominal pain, whereas no difference in timing of medication administration was noted between traumatic and non-traumatic pain. Among the  hospitalized patients, the chest was the most common location of pain; these patients had lower NRS scores than non-hospitalized patients. Patients with mild to moderate pain were more satisfied then those with severe pain.

CONCLUSIONS

The discrepancy between NRS and VAS scores suggests that pain intensity cannot be determined accurately according to pain scale data alone but should also incorporate clinical judgment.

The effect of music on pain and vital signs of children before and after endoscopy

Background and Aim

Gentle music has relaxing and pain reducing effects. In this study, the effect of music on patients’ vital signs and pain was investigated before and after endoscopy.

Methods

This clinical trial study was conducted on 100 children from seven to fourteen years of age in Gha’em Hospital, Mashhad in 2015. Children were divided into two equal groups (case group=50 and control group=50). The control group received endoscopy according to the standards, without any other procedure. For the case group, a classic musical piece by Clayderman was played during endoscopy (from the time of entering the endoscopy room to the end of the process). After conducting endoscopy, FALCC scale and Baker-Wong pain scale were filled for both groups. In addition, children’s vital signs including: heart rate (pulse), diastolic and systolic blood pressure were measured before and after endoscopy for both groups. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS16 with the help of Mann-Whitney and Chi-square tests.

Results

No significant difference was found in age, gender distribution of case or control groups (p>0.05). Heart rate and diastolic blood pressure was significantly lower in the music (case) group compared to the control group before endoscopy (p=0.012). In addition, pain score in patients of the music group was lower than the control group (p<0.05).

Conclusion

Playing music for children during endoscopy can reduce pain and anxiety in patients before and after endoscopy.

Prospective analysis of pain and pain management in an emergency department

.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE WORK

The aim of pain management in the Emergency Department (ED) is to temporarily optimize patient quality of life by reducing acute discomfort. The goals of this study were to evaluate the intensity and location of pain experienced by patients in the ED, the time to analgesia administration in the ED, and the patient's satisfaction so to identify potential useful interventions to improve pain management.

METHODS

We prospectively collected data on the intensity of pain experienced by 137 patients during their ED stays using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Patients were further stratified by pain intensity according to three categories, and by cause of pain.

RESULTS

NRS pain measurements were higher than VAS measurements. Patients who took pain medication within a few hours before their ED visit had a higher mean VAS score at arrival in comparison to patients who did not. Patients treated with pain medications, compared to the non-treated, had more pain at arrival; abdominal pain was treated earlier than non-abdominal pain, whereas no difference in timing of medication administration was noted between traumatic and non-traumatic pain. Among the  hospitalized patients, the chest was the most common location of pain; these patients had lower NRS scores than non-hospitalized patients. Patients with mild to moderate pain were more satisfied then those with severe pain.

CONCLUSIONS

The discrepancy between NRS and VAS scores suggests that pain intensity cannot be determined accurately according to pain scale data alone but should also incorporate clinical judgment.