Literature DB >> 16808767

Effect of implementing pain management standards.

Smitha Narasimhaswamy1, Charanjit Vedi, Ylone Xavier, Chi-hong Tseng, Daniel Shine.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Historical undertreatment of pain among inpatients has resulted in a national requirement for pain practice standards.
OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that adoption/promulgation of practice standards in January 2003 at 1 suburban teaching hospital progressively increased compliance with those standards and decreased pain.
DESIGN: We retrospectively reviewed medical records each month during 2003, when pain standards were adopted with repeated, institution-wide, and nursing-unit-based interventions. Also, we reviewed discharges during 1 month in adjacent years. PATIENTS: We identified adult patients from 20 medical and surgical All-Payer Refined Disease Related Groupings (APRDRGs) in which opiate charges were most common in 2003. Among these, we considered patients actually receiving opiates and randomly chose equal numbers of matching subjects in each month of 2003. Matching was for APRDRG and complexity group. We also matched January 2003 discharges with those from January 2001, 2002, and 2004. MEASUREMENTS: For each patient, we captured 3 variables measuring standards compliance: percentage pain observations reported numerically, number of observations, and median time to reassessment after opiates. We also captured 3 pain variables: median pain score, rate of improvement in pain score, and total opiates dispensed.
RESULTS: There were 360 qualifying discharges in 2003, and 75 in the other years. Numeric observations increased 15%, number of assessments 36%, and reassessment time decreased 60%. All changes were significant but occurred before standards implementation. Among pain measures, only rate of pain improvement changed, worsening slightly but significantly (-0.02 to -0.005 U/h), also before standards.
CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of pain practice standards affected neither practice nor pain.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16808767      PMCID: PMC1924711          DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00457.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  12 in total

Review 1.  From the gate to the neuromatrix.

Authors:  R Melzack
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 6.961

Review 2.  Molecular mechanisms of nociception.

Authors:  D Julius; A I Basbaum
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2001-09-13       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 3.  Molecular biology of opioid analgesia.

Authors:  Gavril W Pasternak
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.612

4.  The impact of the joint commission for accreditation of healthcare organizations pain initiative on perioperative opiate consumption and recovery room length of stay.

Authors:  Peter E Frasco; Juraj Sprung; Terrence L Trentman
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 5.108

Review 5.  American pain society recommendations for improving the quality of acute and cancer pain management: American Pain Society Quality of Care Task Force.

Authors:  Debra B Gordon; June L Dahl; Christine Miaskowski; Bill McCarberg; Knox H Todd; Judith A Paice; Arthur G Lipman; Marilyn Bookbinder; Steve H Sanders; Dennis C Turk; Daniel B Carr
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2005-07-25

6.  Undertreatment of medical inpatients with narcotic analgesics.

Authors:  R M Marks; E J Sachar
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1973-02       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 7.  Organization of endogenous opiate and nonopiate pain control systems.

Authors:  L R Watkins; D J Mayer
Journal:  Science       Date:  1982-06-11       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Has the pendulum swung too far in postoperative pain control?

Authors:  Shiv Taylor; Anthony E Voytovich; Robert A Kozol
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 2.565

Review 9.  Quality improvement guidelines for the treatment of acute pain and cancer pain. American Pain Society Quality of Care Committee.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995-12-20       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Practice guidelines for acute pain management in the perioperative setting: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Acute Pain Management.

Authors: 
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 7.892

View more
  5 in total

1.  Can Multidimensional Pain Assessment Tools Help Improve Pain Outcomes in the Perianesthesia Setting?

Authors:  Emily Petti; Clara Scher; Lauren Meador; Janet H Van Cleave; M Carrington Reid
Journal:  J Perianesth Nurs       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 1.084

2.  Measuring pain impact versus pain severity using a numeric rating scale.

Authors:  Liana Fraenkel; Paul Falzer; Terri Fried; Minna Kohler; Ellen Peters; Robert Kerns; Howard Leventhal
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2011-11-12       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Creative solution for implementation of experiential, competency-based palliative care training for internal medicine residents.

Authors:  Douglas D Ross; Deborah W Shpritz; Susan D Wolfsthal; Ann B Zimrin; Timothy J Keay; Hong-Bin Fang; Carl A Schuetz; Laura M Stapleton; David E Weissman
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.037

4.  Putting pain assessment into practice: why is it so painful?

Authors:  Linda S Franck; Elizabeth Bruce
Journal:  Pain Res Manag       Date:  2009 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.037

5.  Pain as the fifth vital sign-A comparison between public and private healthcare systems.

Authors:  Daniel Humberto Pozza; Luís Filipe Azevedo; José Manuel Castro Lopes
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-11-03       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.