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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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.
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