BackgroundMultidisciplinary pain treatment facilities (MPTFs) are considered the optimal settings for the management of chronic pain (CP). This study aimed (1) to determine the distribution of MPTFs across Canada, (2) to document time to access and types of services, and (3) to compare the results to those obtained in 2005–2006.MethodsThis cross-sectional study used the same MPTF definition as in 2005–2006—that is, a clinic staffed with professionals from a minimum of three different disciplines (including at least one medical specialty) and whose services were integrated within the facility. A comprehensive search strategy was used to identify existing MPTFs across Canada. Administrative leads at each MPTF were invited to complete an online questionnaire regarding their facilities.ResultsQuestionnaires were completed by 104 MPTFs (response rate 79.4%). Few changes were observed in the distribution of MPTFs across Canada compared with 12 years ago. Most (91.3%) are concentrated in large urban cities. Prince Edward Island and the Territories still lack MPTFs. The number of pediatric-only MPTFs has nearly doubled but remains small (n=9). The median wait time for a first appointment in publicly funded MPTFs is about the same as 12 years ago (5.5 vs 6 months). Small but positive changes were also observed.ConclusionAccessibility to public MPTFs continues to be limited in Canada, resulting in lengthy wait times for a first appointment. Community-based MPTFs and virtual care initiatives to distribute pain services into regional and remote communities are needed to provide patients with CP with optimal care.

Introduction:Indigenous children and youth may be quiet about the way they express their pain and hurt which is in contrast to how health professionals are trained to assess it.Objectives:The aim was to understand how youth from 4 First Nation communities express pain using narratives and art-based methods to inform culturally appropriate assessment and treatment.Methods:This qualitative investigation used a community-based participatory action methodology to recruit 42 youth between 8 and 17 years of age to share their perspectives of pain using ethnographic techniques including a Talking Circle followed by a painting workshop. Physical pain perspectives were prominent in circle conversations, but emotional pain, overlapping with physical, mental, and spiritual pain perspectives, was more evident through paintings. Art themes include causes of pain and coping strategies, providing a view into the pain and hurt youth may experience. Youth were more comfortable expressing emotional and mental pain through their artwork, not sharing verbally in conversation.Results:Circle sessions and artwork data were themed using the Indigenous Medicine Wheel. Content of the circle conversations centered on physical pain, whereas paintings depicted mainly emotional pain (eg, crying or loneliness; 74% n = 31) with some overlap with physical pain (eg, injuries; 54%), mental pain (eg, coping strategies; 31%), and spiritual pain (eg, cultural symbols; 30%). Common threads included hiding pain, resilience, tribal consciousness, persistent pain, and loneliness.Conclusion:Once a safe space was created for First Nation youth, they provided a complex, culturally based understanding of the pain and coping experience from both an individual and community perspective. These engaging, culturally sensitive research methods provide direction for health providers regarding the importance of creating a safe space for young people to share their perspectives.

P Pu ur rp po os se e: : To examine the perceived urgency of 13 auditory warning alarms commonly occurring in the hospital operating room.M Me et th ho od ds s: : Undergraduate students, who were naïve with respect to the clinical situation associated with the alarms, judged perceived urgency of each alarm on a ten-point scale.R Re es su ul lt ts s: : The perceived urgency of the alarms was not consistent with the actual urgency of the clinical situation that triggers it. In addition, those alarms indicating patient condition were generally perceived as less urgent than those alarms indicating the operation of equipment. Of particular interest were three sets of alarms designed by equipment manufacturers to indicate specific priorities for action. Listeners did not perceive any differences in the urgency of the 'information only', 'medium' and 'high' priority alarms of two of the monitors with all judged as low to moderate in urgency. In contrast, the high priority alarm of the third monitor was judged as significantly more urgent than its low and medium urgency counterparts.C Co on nc cl lu us si io on n: : The alarms currently in use do not convey the intended sense of urgency to naïve listeners, and this holds even for two sets of alarms designed specifically by manufacturers to convey different levels of urgency. HE modern operating room is replete with computerized equipment dedicated to monitoring patient condition. Although a wealth of information is available from these monitors, the attention of the attending physician cannot be allocated exclusively to these displays. Indeed, attention must be shared between multiple sources including the monitoring equipment, the patient, other physicians, and other pieces of equipment. This demanding situation necessarily means Objectif

No abstract