• M I Emons, T H Scheeper-von der Born, F Petzke, V Ellenrieder, L Reinhardt, W Meißner, and J Erlenwein.
• Klinik für Anästhesiologie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075, Göttingen, Deutschland. miriam.emons@med.uni-goettingen.de.
• Schmerz. 2021 Dec 1; 35 (6): 391-400.

Background, ObjectivesDeficits in the quality of pain management in hospitals have been described for years. The aim of this study was to assess structures and processes of pain management in departments for internal medicine in German hospitals.Materials And MethodsData were collected using a standardized telephone interview (non-university hospital departments) on a randomized sample of hospitals (circa 1/3 of hospitals); all German departments of university hospitals were invited to participate and questioned separately using an online questionnaire (SurveyMonkey®).ResultsData from 139 non-university departments (response rate: 21%) and 33 university hospital departments (only 21 questionnaires were fully answered, response rate 17 and 11%, respectively) were collected. Of 619 non-university hospital departments contacted, 441 explicitly refused to participate in the survey, most often on the grounds that there was no interest in pain management. Pain was regularly recorded as an independent parameter during the medical visit in 89% of the non-university hospital and 96% of the university hospital departments; written standardized treatment protocols for pain therapy were available in 57% of the non-university hospital departments (54% university hospital departments). In 76% of the non-university hospitals departments (100% university hospital departments), an acute pain service was also available for patients of internal medicine departments for co-treatment. Written cooperation agreements were less common (35% non-university hospital departments, 18% university hospital departments).ConclusionThe described implementation of pain management was satisfying in the participating departments. However, in consideration of the low participation and high rejection of participation due to explicit disinterest in the topic, the results should be critically assessed and presumably characterized by a significant positive bias.© 2021. The Author(s).

13 keywords...

hide…