No abstract

AbstractBackground and aimStudies have shown that pain is common among hospitalized patients and that there is a lack of compliance with pain management guidelines. Improving pain management does not only involve developing new drugs or technology; even more important is an effective organisation that utilises existing expertise. The aim of this study was to investigate whether pain in hospitalized patients can be reduced by implementing evidence-based pain management guidelines, providing education for staff and an organisation that includes pain responsibility nurses.MethodsA cross-sectional study was carried out between 2009 and 2010 at two hospitals in southwest Sweden, comprising a baseline survey followed by an intervention. The study involved 306 patients, who answered questions about pain intensity at rest and while moving, disturbed sleep due to pain and whether they had used a pain rating scale while in hospital. Medical records were scrutinised for analgesic prescriptions. An intervention then took place, involving implementation of evidence-based guidelines, staff education and the introduction of pain responsibility nurses. A follow-up survey was carried out in 2012, in which 293 patients answered the same questions and their medical records were also reviewed. The baseline results were then compared with those of the follow-up survey.ResultsWhen compared with the baseline survey, the follow-up survey revealed significant differences in the use of validated pain rating instruments as well as the prescription of more appropriate analgesics. Prescription of paracetamol increased significantly in the follow-up survey; 56% of the patients were prescribed paracetamol on a regular basis, compared with 42% at baseline. There was also a significant increase in the use of strong opioids, from 38% at baseline to 55% at follow-up. Prescriptions of weak opioids decreased from 16% at baseline to 4% at follow-up. No significant differences were observed in patient pain levels in the follow-up survey. At baseline, 29% of the patients reported moderate to severe pain at rest (NRS 4–10) and at follow-up that figure was 24% (NRS 4–10). In both surveys, 41% reported moderate to severe pain (NRS 5–10) during movement. Thirty-nine percent reported disturbed sleep at night at both baseline and follow-up.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that evidence-based guidelines made accessible to all staff as a pocket size booklet and on the intranet, in combination with staff education, pain responsibility nurses who informed other staff on their own wards, improved the prescription of analgesics in the hospitals studied. In order to achieve a noticeable effect for patients, i.e., reduced pain levels, an intervention containing more components than those employed in the present study is required.ImplicationsNurses and physicians need greater knowledge about the importance of pain rating. A vital part of pain management at hospitals is continuous evaluation of treatment outcomes to prevent severe pain and disturbed sleep. The complexity of pain and pain management requires commitment, time and knowledge on the part of healthcare staff. Multi-professional pain teams that support ward staff in pain management are necessary in order to reduce suffering and unnecessary pain in hospitalized patients.

Background Pain is a common symptom in children receiving hospital care. Adequate pain management in paediatric patients is of the utmost importance. Few studies have investigated children’s own experiences of pain during hospitalization. Aim To describe the prevalence of pain, self-reported pain intensity at rest and during movement, pain management and compliance with pain treatment guidelines in children and adolescents receiving hospital care. Furthermore, to examine self-reported statements about pain relief and how often staff asked about pain. Methods A quantitative, cross-sectional study with descriptive statistics as the data analysis method was conducted at a county hospital in western Sweden. Sixty-nine children/adolescents aged 6–18 years who had experienced pain during their hospital stay were included. A structured, verbally administered questionnaire was used to obtain pain reports. The participants were also asked what they considered alleviated pain and how often they told staff about pain. Patient demographics, prescribed analgesics and documentation of pain rating were obtained from medical records. Results Fifty children/adolescents (72%) experienced moderate to severe pain in the previous 24 hours. At the time of the interview 36% reported moderate to severe pain at rest and 58% during movement. Seven participants (10%) reported severe pain both at rest and during movement. About one-third were on a regular multimodal analgesic regimen and 28% had used a validated pain rating scale. Thirty children/adolescents (43%) reported that they had experienced procedural pain in addition to their underlying pain condition. Most of the children/adolescents (74%) reported that analgesics provided pain relief. Forty (58%) stated that various non-pharmacological methods were helpful. Conclusions Despite evidence-based guidelines, half of the children/adolescents experienced moderate to severe pain, highlighting the need for improvement. Pain levels should be assessed both at rest and during movement. Response to treatment should be evaluated to prevent undertreatment of pain. Compliance with guidelines and professional communication are of the utmost importance for pain management in children/adolescents. Non-pharmacological methods are a valuable part of a pain management strategy. This study shows that it is important to evaluate and improve pain care also outside specialised tertiary clinics.

Purpose The prevalence of cancer pain is too high. There is a need for improvement of pain management in cancer care. The aim of this study was to explore whether the use of the multidimensional pain assessment questionnaire Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) could improve pain relief in hospitalized patients with cancer. Methods A controlled intervention study was performed at two hospitals in western Sweden, 264 patients were included, 132 formed a control group and 132 an intervention group. All participants completed the BPI and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) at baseline. Only the researcher had access to questionnaires from the control group. The completed forms from the intervention group were presented to the patients' care team. A follow-up took place after 2-5 days when patients in both groups rated the scales a second time. Results In the intervention group, significant differences in all measured items of the BPI were found at follow-up compared with baseline. Symptoms rated with the ESAS also decreased significantly, except shortness of breath. At follow-up, a significant increase in regular use of paracetamol, anti-neuropathic pain drugs and opioids was found, as well as elevated doses of fixedschedule opioids. In the control group, differences between baseline and follow-up were significant regarding average pain and worst pain over the past 24 h. Conclusion Presenting the patient-reported BPI to the care team helped them to focus on patients' pain, identify pain mechanisms and adjust analgesics accordingly. A possible explanation for the results is changes in the medication prescribed.