Sigridur Gunnarsdottir1, Sigridur Zoëga2, Ronald C Serlin3, Herdis Sveinsdottir4, Elin Johanna Gudrun Hafsteinsdottir5, Nanna Fridriksdottir5, Elfa Tholl Gretarsdottir4, Sandra Evelyn Ward3. 1. Landspítali-The National University Hospital of Iceland, Iceland; University of Iceland, Iceland. Electronic address: sigridgu@landspitali.is. 2. Landspítali-The National University Hospital of Iceland, Iceland; University of Iceland, Iceland. Electronic address: szoega@landspitali.is. 3. University of Wisconsin, Madison, United States. 4. Landspítali-The National University Hospital of Iceland, Iceland; University of Iceland, Iceland. 5. Landspítali-The National University Hospital of Iceland, Iceland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Pain Resource Nurse program is a widely disseminated, evidence-based, nursing staff development program, designed to improve pain management in hospitals. The program has shown promising results, but has never been tested with a rigorous research design. OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to test the effectiveness of the Pain Resource Nurse program. Hypothesized outcomes included improvements in nurses' knowledge, attitudes, and assessment practices, and in patients' participation in decision-making, adequacy of pain management, pain severity, time spent in severe pain, pain interference, and satisfaction. DESIGN: Cluster randomized controlled trial. SETTING:A 650-bed university hospital in Iceland Participants: The sample consisted of a) patients ≥18 years of age, native speaking, hospitalized for at least 24h, alert and able to participate; and b) registered nurses who worked on the participating units. METHODS:Twenty three surgical and medical inpatient units were randomly assigned to the Pain Resource Nurse program (n=12) or to wait list control (n=11). The American Pain Society Outcome Questionnaire and the Knowledge and Attitudes Survey were used to collect data from patients and nurses respectively. Baseline data (T1) for patients were collected simultaneously on all units, followed by data collection from nurses. Then randomization took place, and the Pain Resource Nurse program was instituted. Ten months later, follow up (T2) data were collected, after which the nurses on the control group units received the Pain Resource Nurse program. RESULTS: At baseline, data were collected from 305 of the 396 eligible patients and at follow up from 326 of the 392 eligible patients, a 77% and 83% response rate respectively. At baseline, 232 of 479 eligible nurses responded and at follow-up 176 of the eligible 451 nurses responded, a 49% and 39% response rate, respectively. A nested mixed model analysis of covariance revealed that the intervention was successful in changing pain assessment practices, with pain assessment using standardized measures increasing from 13% to 25% in the intervention group while decreasing from 21% to 16% in the control group. None of the other hypothesized improvements were found. CONCLUSIONS: The Pain Resource Nurse program was successful in improving nurses' use of standardized measures for pain assessment. No effects were found on patient outcomes; pain was both prevalent and severe at both time points. Only minimal improvements were noted in response to this evidence-based staff development program. Changes in pain management practices remain a challenge in clinical settings.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The Pain Resource Nurse program is a widely disseminated, evidence-based, nursing staff development program, designed to improve pain management in hospitals. The program has shown promising results, but has never been tested with a rigorous research design. OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to test the effectiveness of the Pain Resource Nurse program. Hypothesized outcomes included improvements in nurses' knowledge, attitudes, and assessment practices, and in patients' participation in decision-making, adequacy of pain management, pain severity, time spent in severe pain, pain interference, and satisfaction. DESIGN: Cluster randomized controlled trial. SETTING: A 650-bed university hospital in Iceland Participants: The sample consisted of a) patients ≥18 years of age, native speaking, hospitalized for at least 24h, alert and able to participate; and b) registered nurses who worked on the participating units. METHODS: Twenty three surgical and medical inpatient units were randomly assigned to the Pain Resource Nurse program (n=12) or to wait list control (n=11). The American Pain Society Outcome Questionnaire and the Knowledge and Attitudes Survey were used to collect data from patients and nurses respectively. Baseline data (T1) for patients were collected simultaneously on all units, followed by data collection from nurses. Then randomization took place, and the Pain Resource Nurse program was instituted. Ten months later, follow up (T2) data were collected, after which the nurses on the control group units received the Pain Resource Nurse program. RESULTS: At baseline, data were collected from 305 of the 396 eligible patients and at follow up from 326 of the 392 eligible patients, a 77% and 83% response rate respectively. At baseline, 232 of 479 eligible nurses responded and at follow-up 176 of the eligible 451 nurses responded, a 49% and 39% response rate, respectively. A nested mixed model analysis of covariance revealed that the intervention was successful in changing pain assessment practices, with pain assessment using standardized measures increasing from 13% to 25% in the intervention group while decreasing from 21% to 16% in the control group. None of the other hypothesized improvements were found. CONCLUSIONS: The Pain Resource Nurse program was successful in improving nurses' use of standardized measures for pain assessment. No effects were found on patient outcomes; pain was both prevalent and severe at both time points. Only minimal improvements were noted in response to this evidence-based staff development program. Changes in pain management practices remain a challenge in clinical settings.
Authors: M Bérubé; C Gélinas; N Feeley; G Martorella; J Côté; G Y Laflamme; D M Rouleau; M Choinière Journal: Pain Med Date: 2019-10-01 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: P Kutschar; S Berger; A Brandauer; N Freywald; J Osterbrink; D Seidenspinner; I Gnass Journal: J Pain Res Date: 2020-03-26 Impact factor: 3.133