• Orthopaedic nursing · Jul 1997

    Review

    Improving pain management in an acute care setting. The Crawford Long Hospital of Emory University experience.

    • S J Carey, C Turpin, J Smith, J Whatley, and D Haddox.
    • Research Division, Crawford Long Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
    • Orthop Nurs. 1997 Jul 1; 16 (4): 29-36.

    PurposeTo identify which of three pain intensity measurement scales is most appropriate for use with patients admitted to the inpatient units of the study hospital. The following questions were addressed: Is one of the scales easier for most patients? Is the choice of scales influenced by nursing unit, age, education, race, SES, diagnosis, or type of pain experienced? Do patients perceive that a rating scale helps them describe their pain more effectively?Sample267 patients admitted over a 3-week period completed a four-page questionnaire and demographic form distributed on admission. The primary admitting diagnosis for 39.5% of the sample reflected acute pain, 40.3% chronic pain, and 20.2 no pain.MethodsThree pain rating scales were presented: two visual analogues (one contained a 100 mm line; the other contained six faces depicting graduated levels of distress); and a cognitive number rating scale. Each scale used a 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain possible) rating format. Patients completed the questionnaire by rating the intensity of pain experienced using each of the three scales once over the next 24 hours. The last page contained questions related to which of the scales was easiest to use, whether the scale was helpful or needed further explanation, and work and education information. The demographic form was completed from information contained in the patient record.FindingsThe scale selected most frequently was the visual analogue containing faces (48.6%), followed by the number (35.3%) and line scales (16.1%). None of the demographic information was found to significantly influence choice of preferred scale. A majority (85.8%) indicated a rating scale as helpful; only 13.6% indicated a need for further explanation. The means for pain intensity ranged from 5.09 to 5.75. The interval between pain ratings for the majority (> 71%) was less than 2 hours. Patients tended to tell the nurse about their pain when the intensity exceeded the midpoint on the scales. A reliability coefficient for the three scales was computed at alpha = 0.88.ConclusionThe use of rating scales for pain assessment in adult inpatient units was viewed positively by patients. Recommendations for incorporating self-ratings of pain intensity are set forth. Involving both patients and providers in the process is essential to improving both our processes and the outcomes achieved.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.