Stephen F Butler1, Kevin L Zacharoff2, Sadaf Charity2, Ryan A Black2, Emma Chung2, Antje Barreveld3, Molly S Clark4, Robert N Jamison5. 1. *Inflexxion, Inc, Newton, Massachusetts sfbutler@inflexxion.com. 2. *Inflexxion, Inc, Newton, Massachusetts. 3. Pain Management Center, Newton-Wellesley Hospital, Newton, Massachusetts. 4. University of Mississippi Medical Center, Family Medicine, Jackson, Mississippi. 5. Pain Management Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A comprehensive electronic self-report assessment, called PainCAS® (Clinical Assessment System), was developed and implemented in three clinics. PainCAS captures demographic information, pain assessment, quality-of-life variables, and contains validated, electronic versions of screeners for risk of aberrant opioid-related behaviors (the SOAPP and COMM). This investigation sought to determine the impact of PainCAS on documentation of pain and opioid risk evaluations. Exploratory hypotheses examined changes in the content of the patient-provider interaction and any impact on outcome. METHODS: In study 1, chart reviews were conducted between pain patients who completed the electronic program (N = 89) and controls who represented standard of care (N = 120). In study 2, two groups of chronic pain patients (treatment-as-usual Control condition = 75, PainCAS Experimental condition = 72) were interviewed after completing their index clinic visit and completed mailed questionnaires 3 months later. RESULTS: Results revealed significantly more key, pain-relevant chart elements documented in charts of patients who completed the PainCAS than those using a traditional paper questionnaire (Study 1; <0.001). In Study 2, the Experimental group reported more discussion about legal issues, substance use history, and medication safety compared with the Control group (p < 0.05). Satisfaction questionnaire responses supported provider and patient perceived benefit from using PainCAS. However, as expected, no differences were found between conditions on outcome measures of pain, mood, and function. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that use of the PainCAS electronic pain assessment improves documentation of chart elements in clinic notes and is associated with increased discussion of key, pain-relevant topics during the clinical visit.
OBJECTIVE: A comprehensive electronic self-report assessment, called PainCAS® (Clinical Assessment System), was developed and implemented in three clinics. PainCAS captures demographic information, pain assessment, quality-of-life variables, and contains validated, electronic versions of screeners for risk of aberrant opioid-related behaviors (the SOAPP and COMM). This investigation sought to determine the impact of PainCAS on documentation of pain and opioid risk evaluations. Exploratory hypotheses examined changes in the content of the patient-provider interaction and any impact on outcome. METHODS: In study 1, chart reviews were conducted between painpatients who completed the electronic program (N = 89) and controls who represented standard of care (N = 120). In study 2, two groups of chronic painpatients (treatment-as-usual Control condition = 75, PainCAS Experimental condition = 72) were interviewed after completing their index clinic visit and completed mailed questionnaires 3 months later. RESULTS: Results revealed significantly more key, pain-relevant chart elements documented in charts of patients who completed the PainCAS than those using a traditional paper questionnaire (Study 1; <0.001). In Study 2, the Experimental group reported more discussion about legal issues, substance use history, and medication safety compared with the Control group (p < 0.05). Satisfaction questionnaire responses supported provider and patient perceived benefit from using PainCAS. However, as expected, no differences were found between conditions on outcome measures of pain, mood, and function. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that use of the PainCAS electronic pain assessment improves documentation of chart elements in clinic notes and is associated with increased discussion of key, pain-relevant topics during the clinical visit.
Authors: Hammam Akbik; Stephen F Butler; Simon H Budman; Katherine Fernandez; Nathaniel P Katz; Robert N Jamison Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Ellen C Meltzer; Denis Rybin; Richard Saitz; Jeffrey H Samet; Sonia L Schwartz; Stephen F Butler; Jane M Liebschutz Journal: Pain Date: 2010-12-21 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: Roger Chou; Gilbert J Fanciullo; Perry G Fine; Jeremy A Adler; Jane C Ballantyne; Pamela Davies; Marilee I Donovan; David A Fishbain; Kathy M Foley; Jeffrey Fudin; Aaron M Gilson; Alexander Kelter; Alexander Mauskop; Patrick G O'Connor; Steven D Passik; Gavril W Pasternak; Russell K Portenoy; Ben A Rich; Richard G Roberts; Knox H Todd; Christine Miaskowski Journal: J Pain Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 5.820
Authors: Stephen F Butler; Simon H Budman; Kathrine C Fernandez; Brian Houle; Christine Benoit; Nathaniel Katz; Robert N Jamison Journal: Pain Date: 2007-05-09 Impact factor: 6.961