Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Acute Painful Episode (acute + painful_episode)
Selected AbstractsAbility of Patients to Accurately Recall the Severity of Acute Painful EventsACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 3 2001Adam J. Singer MD Abstract. Objective: Pain studies require prospective patient enrollment to ensure accurate pain assessment. The authors correlated pain assessments of an acute painful episode over a one-week period and determined the accuracy of patient pain severity recall over time. Methods: This was a prospective, descriptive, longitudinal study. Participants were a convenience sample of 50 emergency department patients with acute pain resulting from injuries or painful invasive procedures. A trained research assistant administered a structured pain survey containing demographic and historical features to all patients. Patients sequentially assessed their pain severity using a vertical 100-mm visual analog scale marked "most pain" at the top, a verbal numeric rating scale ranging from 0 to 100 from none to worst (NRS100), and a verbal numeric rating scale ranging from 0 to 10 from none to worst (NRS10). Patients were contacted by phone and asked to reassess their initial pain severity one and seven days later using the two verbal numeric rating scales. Analysis of pain assessments using the various scales at the three time intervals was performed with Pearson's and Spearman's coefficients and repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results: There were 50 patients with a mean age of 41 years. Correlation between initial pain assessments on the three scales ranged from 0.83 to 0.92. Correlations between the initial and 24-hour assessments were NRS100-0.98 and NRS10-0.98. Correlations between the initial and one-week assessments were NRS100-0.96 and NRS10-0.97. Repeated-measures ANOVA showed no significant change in pain assessments over time for both verbal numeric scales. Conclusions: Pain severity assessments of acute painful events one and seven days later were similar and highly correlated with initial assessments using both verbal numeric scales. Patients accurately recall the severity of an acute painful episode for at least one week after its occurrence, which may allow retrospective pain assessments. [source] Emergency Department Management of Acute Pain Episodes in Sickle Cell DiseaseACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 5 2007Paula Tanabe PhD ObjectivesTo characterize the initial management of patients with sickle cell disease and an acute pain episode, to compare these practices with the American Pain Society Guideline for the Management of Acute and Chronic Pain in Sickle-Cell Disease in the emergency department, and to identify factors associated with a delay in receiving an initial analgesic. MethodsThis was a multicenter retrospective design. Consecutive patients with an emergency department visit in 2004 for an acute pain episode related to sickle cell disease were included. Exclusion criteria included age younger than 18 years. A structured medical record review was used to abstract data, including the following outcome variables: analgesic agent and dose, route, and time to administration of initial analgesic. Additional variables included demographics, triage level, intravenous access, and study site. Mann,Whitney U test or Kruskal,Wallis test and multivariate regression were used to identify differences in time to receiving an initial analgesic between groups. ResultsThere were 612 patient visits, with 159 unique patients. Median time to administration of an initial analgesic was 90 minutes (25th to 75th interquartile range, 54,159 minutes). During 87% of visits, patients received the recommended agent (morphine or hydromorphone); 92% received the recommended dose, and 55% received the drug by the recommended route (intravenously or subcutaneously). Longer times to administration occurred in female patients (mean difference, 21 minutes; 95% confidence interval = 7 to 36 minutes; p = 0.003) and patients assigned triage level 3, 4, or 5 versus 1 or 2 (mean difference, 45 minutes; 95% confidence interval = 29 to 61 minutes; p = 0.00). Patients from study sites 1 and 2 also experienced longer delays. ConclusionsPatients with an acute painful episode related to sickle cell disease experienced significant delays to administration of an initial analgesic. [source] Ethical issues in the management of sickle cell painAMERICAN JOURNAL OF HEMATOLOGY, Issue 2 2001Samir K. Ballas Abstract Care providers who manage patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) often face several questions. Most prominent among these pertain to the importance of pain and its treatment. The duties of the health care providers concerning pain management are often not well defined and vary considerably among providers and institutions. Despite the availability of national guidelines that address the ethical issues of pain management, patients with SCD often receive suboptimal pain control, especially during acute painful episodes. Although there are many reasons for this situation, an important aspect of the problem pertains to the complexity of applying ethical standards to specific patients with sickle cell pain. Decisions are frequently made according to perceptions and circumstances without taking ethical principles into consideration. The purpose of this paper is to present the range of ethical principles pertinent to sickle pain management and discuss specific examples of physician-patient interactions where ethical dilemmas occur. Am. J. Hematol. 68:127,132, 2001. © 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] Emergency Department Sickle Cell Assessment of Needs and Strengths (ED-SCANS), a Focus Group and Decision Support Tool Development ProjectACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 8 2010Paula Tanabe PhD ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2010; 17:848,858 © 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Abstract Objectives:, A decision support tool may guide emergency clinicians in recognizing assessment, analgesic and overall management, and health service delivery needs for patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) in the emergency department (ED). We aimed to identify data and process elements important in making decisions regarding evaluation and management of adult patients in the ED with painful episodes of SCD. Methods:, Qualitative methods using a series of focus groups and grounded theory were used. Eligible participants included adult clients with SCD and emergency physicians and nurses with a minimum of 1 year of experience providing care to patients with SCD in the ED. Patients were recruited in conjunction with annual SCD meetings, and providers included clinicians who were and were not affiliated with sickle cell centers. Groups were conducted until saturation was reached and included a total of two patient groups, three physician groups, and two nurse groups. Focus groups were held in New York, Durham, Chicago, New Orleans, and Denver. Clinician participants were asked the following three questions to guide the discussion: 1) what information would be important to know about patients with SCD in the ED setting to effectively care for them and help you identify patient analgesic, treatment, and referral needs? 2) What treatment decisions would you make with this information? and 3) What characteristics would a decision support tool need to have to make it meaningful and useful? Client participants were asked the same questions with rewording to reflect what they believed providers should know to provide the best care and what they should do with the information. All focus groups were audiotaped and transcribed. The constant comparative method was used to analyze the data. Two coders independently coded participant responses and identified focal themes based on the key questions. An investigator and assistant independently reviewed the transcripts and met until the final coding structure was determined. Results:, Forty-seven individuals participated (14 persons with SCD, 16 physicians, and 17 nurses) in a total of seven different groups. Two major themes emerged: acute management and health care utilization. Major subthemes included the following: physiologic findings, diagnostics, assessment and treatment of acute painful episodes, and disposition. The most common minor subthemes that emerged included past medical history, presence of a medical home (physician or clinic), individualized analgesic treatment plan for treatment of painful episodes, history of present illness, medical home follow-up available, patient-reported analgesic treatment that works, and availability of analgesic prescription at discharge. Additional important elements in treatment of acute pain episodes included the use of a standard analgesic protocol, need for fluids and nonpharmacologic interventions, and the assessment of typicality of pain presentation. The patients' interpretation of the need for hospital admission also ranked high. Conclusions:, Participants identified several areas that are important in the assessment, management, and disposition decisions that may help guide best practices for SCD patients in the ED setting. [source] | ||||||||||