Cargando…
A prospective comparison between multidisciplinary healthcare providers' clinical examination and a validated pain scale
INTRODUCTION: Unrecognized pain in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), due to inadequate assessment and therapeutic management, is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Despite the availability of validated pain monitoring tools, such as the Critical-Care Pain Observational Tool (CPOT), thes...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9411743/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36034751 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpain.2022.960216 |
_version_ | 1784775337219981312 |
---|---|
author | Menezes, Rodrigo C. Silva, Raissa L. O. Arriaga, María B. Ferreira, Isabella B. B. Carmo, Thomas A. da Silva, Victor R. Otero, Matheus L. Gobatto, André L. N. Agareno, Sydney Filgueiras Filho, Nivaldo M. Akrami, Kevan M. Andrade, Bruno B. |
author_facet | Menezes, Rodrigo C. Silva, Raissa L. O. Arriaga, María B. Ferreira, Isabella B. B. Carmo, Thomas A. da Silva, Victor R. Otero, Matheus L. Gobatto, André L. N. Agareno, Sydney Filgueiras Filho, Nivaldo M. Akrami, Kevan M. Andrade, Bruno B. |
author_sort | Menezes, Rodrigo C. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Unrecognized pain in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), due to inadequate assessment and therapeutic management, is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Despite the availability of validated pain monitoring tools, such as the Critical-Care Pain Observational Tool (CPOT), these scales are not commonly used in clinical practice, with healthcare professionals often relying on their clinical impression. Our study aims to determine the agreement between the pain examination performed by ICU professionals and the CPOT. METHODS: Prospective cohort study that included critically ill patients and physicians, nurses and physiotherapists from an ICU in Bahia, Brazil. During bedside clinical rounds, the CPOT score was applied to assess the pain of hospitalized patients, and health professionals were interviewed to ascertain their perception of the patient's pain for a maximum of five consecutive days. Correlations were assessed using the Spearman rank tests. Hierarchical cluster analysis was employed to show the results of CPOT score and pain assessment by healthcare professionals at each study time. And the Kappa statistic was calculated to assess the agreement between the CPOT score vs. the pain assessment by healthcare providers. RESULTS: One hundred one patients were included in the study with median age of 74 years (IQR 61.5–83.5), a predominance of women (55.4%) and a median SAPS 3 score of 45 (IQR 39.5–53.0). The correlation between the professional's pain assessment and the CPOT were mostly statistically significant, ranged from negligible to weak, being the highest index obtained in the evaluation of nurses on day 5 (Kappa index = 0.43, p = 0.005). Physician assessments were significant only in day 1. On the presence of pain, the professionals' assessments and CPOT revealed mild to a moderate agreement. CONCLUSION: Healthcare professional's pain assessment displayed a weak positive correlation with a validated pain scale and poor agreement amongst members of the ICU team, particularly when the pain was felt to be absent. Thus, this study highlights the importance of routine tools for pain assessment in the ICU for all members of multidisciplinary teams. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9411743 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94117432022-08-27 A prospective comparison between multidisciplinary healthcare providers' clinical examination and a validated pain scale Menezes, Rodrigo C. Silva, Raissa L. O. Arriaga, María B. Ferreira, Isabella B. B. Carmo, Thomas A. da Silva, Victor R. Otero, Matheus L. Gobatto, André L. N. Agareno, Sydney Filgueiras Filho, Nivaldo M. Akrami, Kevan M. Andrade, Bruno B. Front Pain Res (Lausanne) Pain Research INTRODUCTION: Unrecognized pain in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), due to inadequate assessment and therapeutic management, is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Despite the availability of validated pain monitoring tools, such as the Critical-Care Pain Observational Tool (CPOT), these scales are not commonly used in clinical practice, with healthcare professionals often relying on their clinical impression. Our study aims to determine the agreement between the pain examination performed by ICU professionals and the CPOT. METHODS: Prospective cohort study that included critically ill patients and physicians, nurses and physiotherapists from an ICU in Bahia, Brazil. During bedside clinical rounds, the CPOT score was applied to assess the pain of hospitalized patients, and health professionals were interviewed to ascertain their perception of the patient's pain for a maximum of five consecutive days. Correlations were assessed using the Spearman rank tests. Hierarchical cluster analysis was employed to show the results of CPOT score and pain assessment by healthcare professionals at each study time. And the Kappa statistic was calculated to assess the agreement between the CPOT score vs. the pain assessment by healthcare providers. RESULTS: One hundred one patients were included in the study with median age of 74 years (IQR 61.5–83.5), a predominance of women (55.4%) and a median SAPS 3 score of 45 (IQR 39.5–53.0). The correlation between the professional's pain assessment and the CPOT were mostly statistically significant, ranged from negligible to weak, being the highest index obtained in the evaluation of nurses on day 5 (Kappa index = 0.43, p = 0.005). Physician assessments were significant only in day 1. On the presence of pain, the professionals' assessments and CPOT revealed mild to a moderate agreement. CONCLUSION: Healthcare professional's pain assessment displayed a weak positive correlation with a validated pain scale and poor agreement amongst members of the ICU team, particularly when the pain was felt to be absent. Thus, this study highlights the importance of routine tools for pain assessment in the ICU for all members of multidisciplinary teams. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-08-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9411743/ /pubmed/36034751 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpain.2022.960216 Text en Copyright © 2022 Menezes, Silva, Arriaga, Ferreira, Carmo, da Silva, Otero, Gobatto, Agareno, Filgueiras Filho, Akrami and Andrade. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Pain Research Menezes, Rodrigo C. Silva, Raissa L. O. Arriaga, María B. Ferreira, Isabella B. B. Carmo, Thomas A. da Silva, Victor R. Otero, Matheus L. Gobatto, André L. N. Agareno, Sydney Filgueiras Filho, Nivaldo M. Akrami, Kevan M. Andrade, Bruno B. A prospective comparison between multidisciplinary healthcare providers' clinical examination and a validated pain scale |
title | A prospective comparison between multidisciplinary healthcare providers' clinical examination and a validated pain scale |
title_full | A prospective comparison between multidisciplinary healthcare providers' clinical examination and a validated pain scale |
title_fullStr | A prospective comparison between multidisciplinary healthcare providers' clinical examination and a validated pain scale |
title_full_unstemmed | A prospective comparison between multidisciplinary healthcare providers' clinical examination and a validated pain scale |
title_short | A prospective comparison between multidisciplinary healthcare providers' clinical examination and a validated pain scale |
title_sort | prospective comparison between multidisciplinary healthcare providers' clinical examination and a validated pain scale |
topic | Pain Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9411743/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36034751 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpain.2022.960216 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT menezesrodrigoc aprospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT silvaraissalo aprospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT arriagamariab aprospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT ferreiraisabellabb aprospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT carmothomasa aprospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT dasilvavictorr aprospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT oteromatheusl aprospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT gobattoandreln aprospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT agarenosydney aprospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT filgueirasfilhonivaldom aprospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT akramikevanm aprospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT andradebrunob aprospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT menezesrodrigoc prospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT silvaraissalo prospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT arriagamariab prospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT ferreiraisabellabb prospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT carmothomasa prospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT dasilvavictorr prospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT oteromatheusl prospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT gobattoandreln prospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT agarenosydney prospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT filgueirasfilhonivaldom prospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT akramikevanm prospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale AT andradebrunob prospectivecomparisonbetweenmultidisciplinaryhealthcareprovidersclinicalexaminationandavalidatedpainscale |