Analgesic use in the emergency department

Pain intervention for infant lumbar puncture in the emergency department: physician practice and beliefs

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to characterize physician beliefs and practice of analgesia and anesthesia use for infant lumbar puncture (LP) in the emergency department (ED) and to determine if provider training type, experience, and beliefs are associated with reported pain intervention use.

METHODS

An anonymous survey was distributed to ED faculty and pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) fellows at five Midwestern hospitals. Questions consisted of categorical, yes/no, descriptive, and incremental responses. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics with confidence intervals (CIs) and odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

A total of 156 of 164 surveys (95%) distributed were completed and analyzed. Training background of respondents was 52% emergency medicine (EM), 30% PEM, and 18% pediatrics. Across training types, there was no difference in the belief that pain treatment was worthwhile (overall 78%) or in the likelihood of using at least one pain intervention. Pharmacologic pain interventions (sucrose, injectable lidocaine, and topical anesthetic) were used in the majority of LPs by 20, 29, and 27% of respondents, respectively. Nonpharmacologic pain intervention (pacifier/nonnutritive sucking) was used in the majority of LPs by 67% of respondents. Many respondents indicated that they never used sucrose (53%), lidocaine (41%), or anesthetic cream (49%). Physicians who thought pain treatment was worthwhile were more likely to use both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic pain interventions than those who did not (93% vs. 53%, OR = 10.98, 95% CI = 4.16 to 29.00). The number of LPs performed or supervised per year was not associated with pain intervention use. Other than pacifiers, injectable lidocaine was the most frequently reported pain intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Provider beliefs regarding infant pain are associated with variation in anesthesia and analgesia use during infant LP in the ED. Although the majority of physicians hold the belief that pain intervention is worthwhile in this patient group, self-reported pharmacologic interventions to reduce pain associated with infant LP are used regularly by less than one-third. Strategies targeting physician beliefs on infant pain should be developed to improve pain intervention use in the ED for infant LPs.

Out-of-hospital emergency medicine in pediatric patients: prevalence and management of pain

INTRODUCTION

Much less is known about pain prevalence in pediatric patients in an out-of-hospital than emergency department setting. The purpose of this study was to determine pain prevalence in children in a prehospital emergency setting and to identify the factors associated with pain relief.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective cohort study in consecutive patients 15 years or younger was conducted by 5 mobile intensive care units working 24/7 (January-December 2005). The presence of pain, its intensity, and alleviation by the administration of analgesics were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 258 of 433 pediatric patients were included, of whom 96 were suffering from acute pain (37%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 31-43) that was intense to severe in 67% of cases. Trauma was the only factor significantly associated with acute pain (odds ratio, 818; 95% CI, 153-4376). Overall, 92% of the children in pain received at least one analgesic drug; 41% received a combination of drugs. Opioid administration was significantly associated with intense to severe pain (odds ratio, 7; 95% CI, 2-25). On arrival at hospital, 67% of the children were still in pain; but 84% had experienced some pain relief regardless of their sex, age, or disorder.

CONCLUSION

In a prehospital emergency setting, more than a third of children experience acute pain with a high prevalence of intense to severe pain. Scoring pain in children, and especially in the newborn, is beleaguered by a lack of suitable scales. Despite this, it was possible to treat 90% of children in pain and provide relief in 80% of cases.

Physician race/ethnicity predicts successful emergency department analgesia

This study investigated the association between effectiveness of ED pain treatment and race of patients, race of providers, and the concordance of patient and provider race, with a prospective, multicenter study of patients presenting to 1 of 20 US and Canadian EDs with moderate to severe pain. Primary outcome is a 2-point or greater reduction in pain intensity, measured with an 11-point verbal scale, considered the minimum clinically important reduction in pain intensity. A total of 776 patients were enrolled. The sample included 57% female, 44% white, 26% black, and 26% Hispanic. The physician was white in 85% of encounters. Arrival pain score (adjusted odds ratio, 1.14; 95% CI 1.06, 1.24), receipt of any ED analgesia (1.59; 95% CI 1.17, 2.17), and physician nonwhite race (1.68; 95% CI 1.10, 2.55) were significant predictors of clinically significant reduction in pain intensity in multivariate analysis. Nonwhite physicians achieved better pain control without using more analgesics. Future research should explore the determinants of this difference in patient response to pain treatment related to provider race including provider characteristics and training that were not measured in this study. This study provided no evidence supporting an effect of racial concordance on the primary outcome.

PERSPECTIVE

This article presents analysis of predictors of clinically important reduction in pain intensity among emergency department patients, finding nonwhite physicians achieving better pain relief with less analgesia. This finding should encourage researchers to investigate elements of the therapeutic relationship that may be enhanced to achieve better pain relief for patients.

The effect of emergency department crowding on analgesia in patients with back pain in two hospitals

OBJECTIVES

The authors assessed the association between measures of emergency department (ED) crowding and treatment with analgesia and delays to analgesia in ED patients with back pain.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of nonpregnant patients who presented to two EDs (an academic ED and a community ED in the same health system) from July 1, 2003, to February 28, 2007, with a chief complaint of "back pain." Each patient had four validated crowding measures assigned at triage. Main outcomes were the use of analgesia and delays in time to receiving analgesia. Delays were defined as greater than 1 hour to receive any analgesia from the triage time and from the room placement time. The Cochrane-Armitage test for trend, the Cuzick test for trend, and relative risk (RR) regression were used to test the effects of crowding on outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 5,616 patients with back pain presented to the two EDs over the study period (mean+/-SD age=44+/-17 years, 57% female, 62% black or African American). Of those, 4,425 (79%) received any analgesia while in the ED. A total of 3,589 (81%) experienced a delay greater than 1 hour from triage to analgesia, and 2,985 (67%) experienced a delay more than 1 hour from room placement to analgesia. When hospitals were analyzed separately, a higher proportion of patients experienced delays at the academic site compared with the community site for triage to analgesia (87% vs. 74%) and room to analgesia (71% vs. 63%; both p<0.001). All ED crowding measures were associated with a higher likelihood for delays in both outcomes. At the academic site, patients were more likely to receive analgesia at the highest waiting room numbers. There were no other differences in ED crowding and likelihood of receiving medications in the ED at the two sites. These associations persisted in the adjusted analysis after controlling for potential confounders of analgesia administration.

CONCLUSIONS

As ED crowding increases, there is a higher likelihood of delays in administration of pain medication in patients with back pain. Analgesia administration was not related to three measures of ED crowding; however, patients were actually more likely to receive analgesics when the waiting room was at peak levels in the academic ED.

Ibuprofen provides analgesia equivalent to acetaminophen-codeine in the treatment of acute pain in children with extremity injuries: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

This study compared the analgesic effectiveness of acetaminophen-codeine with that of ibuprofen for children with acute traumatic extremity pain, with the hypothesis that the two medications would demonstrate equivalent reduction in pain scores in an emergency department (ED) setting.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blinded equivalence trial. Pediatric ED patients 5 to 17 years of age with acute traumatic extremity pain received acetaminophen-codeine (1 mg/kg as codeine, maximum 60 mg) or ibuprofen (10 mg/kg, maximum 400 mg). The patients provided Color Analog Scale (CAS) pain scores at baseline and at 20, 40, and 60 minutes after medication administration. The primary outcome measured was the difference in changes in pain score at 40 minutes, compared to a previously described minimal clinically significant change in pain score of 2 cm. The difference was defined as (change in ibuprofen CAS score from baseline) - (change in acetaminophen-codeine CAS score from baseline); negative values thus favor the ibuprofen group. Additional outcomes included need for rescue medication and adverse effects.

RESULTS

The 32 acetaminophen-codeine and the 34 ibuprofen recipients in our convenience sample had indistinguishable pain scores at baseline. The intergroup differences in pain score change at 20 minutes (-0.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.5 to 0.3), 40 minutes (-0.4, 95% CI = -1.4 to 0.6), and 60 minutes (0.2, 95% CI = -0.8 to 1.2) were all less than 2 cm. Adverse effects were minimal: vomiting (one patient after acetaminophen-codeine), nausea (one patient after ibuprofen), and pruritus (one after acetaminophen-codeine). The three patients in each group who received rescue medications all had radiographically demonstrated fractures or dislocations.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found similar performance of acetaminophen-codeine and ibuprofen in analgesic effectiveness among ED patients aged 5-17 years with acute traumatic extremity pain. Both drugs provided measurable analgesia. Patients tolerated them well, with few treatment failures and minimal adverse effects.

Impact of Liberalization of Protocols for the Use of Morphine Sulfate in an Urban Emergency Medical Services System

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of liberalization of paramedic management protocols for the use of morphine sulfate (MS).

METHODS

A retrospective database analysis tallied and categorized MS use into seven conditions during two intervals--six months before (control) and six months after (study) the protocol change.

RESULTS

In the control interval, 760 of 34,020 (2.2%) patients received MS. In the study interval, 999 of 30,320 (3.3%) received the drug, a 50% relative increase in MS use. MS use dramatically increased in two assessment categories: other painful medical conditions (19.0% vs. 2.8% of transports, relative risk [RR] 6.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.2-8.9) and nontraumatic abdominal pain (9.2% vs. 1.9% of transports, RR 4.8, 95% CI 3.3-6.9).

CONCLUSION

Liberalization of pain management protocols resulted in an appreciable increase in the use of MS only in medical categories, predominantly abdominal pain, with no apparent safety or misuse issues.

The association between emergency department crowding and analgesia administration in acute abdominal pain patients

OBJECTIVES

The authors assessed the effect of emergency department (ED) crowding on the nontreatment and delay in treatment for analgesia in patients who had acute abdominal pain.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of prospectively enrolled nonpregnant adult patients presenting to an urban teaching ED with abdominal pain during a 9-month period. Each patient had four validated crowding measures assigned at triage. Main outcomes were the administration of and delays in time to analgesia. A delay was defined as waiting more than 1 hour for analgesia. Relative risk (RR) regression was used to test the effects of crowding on outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 976 abdominal pain patients (mean [+/-standard deviation] age = 41 [+/-16.6] years; 65% female, 62% black) were enrolled, of whom 649 (67%) received any analgesia. Of those treated, 457 (70%) experienced a delay in analgesia from triage, and 320 (49%) experienced a delay in analgesia after room placement. After adjusting for possible confounders of the ED administration of analgesia (age, sex, race, triage class, severe pain, final diagnosis of either abdominal pain not otherwise specified or gastroenteritis), increasing delays in time to analgesia from triage were independently associated with all four crowding measures, comparing the lowest to the highest quartile of crowding (total patient-care hours RR = 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.32 to 1.80; occupancy rate RR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.42 to 1.91; inpatient number RR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.36 to 1.81; and waiting room number RR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.31 to 1.77). Crowding measures were not associated with the failure to treat with analgesia.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency department crowding is associated with delays in analgesic treatment from the time of triage in patients presenting with acute abdominal pain.

Outcomes after intravenous opioids in emergency patients: a prospective cohort analysis

OBJECTIVES

Pain management continues to be suboptimal in emergency departments (EDs). Several studies have documented failures in the processes of care, such as whether opioid analgesics were given. The objectives of this study were to measure the outcomes following administration of intravenous (IV) opioids and to identify clinical factors that may predict poor analgesic outcomes in these patients.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, emergency patients were enrolled if they were prescribed IV morphine or hydromorphone (the most commonly used IV opioids in the study hospital) as their initial analgesic. Patients were surveyed at the time of opioid administration and 1 to 2 hours after the initial opioid dosage. They scored their pain using a verbal 0-10 pain scale. The following binary analgesic variables were primarily used to identify patients with poor analgesic outcomes: 1) a pain score reduction of less than 50%, 2) a postanalgesic pain score of 7 or greater (using the 0-10 numeric rating scale), and 3) the development of opioid-related side effects. Logistic regression analyses were used to study the effects of demographic, clinical, and treatment covariates on the outcome variables.

RESULTS

A total of 2,414 were approached for enrollment, of whom 1,312 were ineligible (658 were identified more than 2 hours after IV opioid was administered and 341 received another analgesic before or with the IV opioid) and 369 declined to consent. A total of 691 patients with a median baseline pain score of 9 were included in the final analyses. Following treatment, 57% of the cohort failed to achieve a 50% pain score reduction, 36% had a pain score of 7 or greater, 48% wanted additional analgesics, and 23% developed opioid-related side effects. In the logistic regression analyses, the factors associated with poor analgesia (both <50% pain score reduction and postanalgesic pain score of >or=7) were the use of long-acting opioids at home, administration of additional analgesics, provider concern for drug-seeking behavior, and older age. An initial pain score of 10 was also strongly associated with a postanalgesic pain score of >or=7. African American patients who were not taking opioids at home were less likely to achieve a 50% pain score reduction than other patients, despite receiving similar initial and total equianalgesic dosages. None of the variables we assessed were significantly associated with the development of opioid-related side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Poor analgesic outcomes were common in this cohort of ED patients prescribed IV opioids. Patients taking long-acting opioids, those thought to be drug-seeking, older patients, those with an initial pain score of 10, and possibly African American patients are at especially high risk of poor analgesia following IV opioid administration.

Quality indicators for geriatric emergency care

OBJECTIVES

Emergency departments (EDs), similar to other health care environments, are concerned with improving the quality of patient care. Older patients comprise a large, growing, and particularly vulnerable subset of ED users. The project objective was to develop ED-specific quality indicators for older patients to help practitioners identify quality gaps and focus quality improvement efforts.

METHODS

The Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) Geriatric Task Force, including members representing the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP), selected three conditions where there are quality gaps in the care of older patients: cognitive assessment, pain management, and transitional care in both directions between nursing homes and EDs. For each condition, a content expert created potential quality indicators based on a systematic review of the literature, supplemented with expert opinion when necessary. The original candidate quality indicators were modified in response to evaluation by four groups: the Task Force, the SAEM Geriatric Interest Group, and audiences at the 2007 SAEM Annual Meeting and the 2008 American Geriatrics Society Annual Meeting.

RESULTS

The authors offer 6 quality indicators for cognitive assessment, 6 for pain management, and 11 for transitions between nursing homes and EDs.

CONCLUSIONS

These quality indicators will help researchers and clinicians target quality improvement efforts. The next steps will be to test the feasibility of capturing the quality indicators in existing medical records and to measure the extent to which each quality indicator is successfully met in current emergency practice.

Does a pain scale improve pain assessment in the pediatric emergency department?

OBJECTIVE

Pain management in children requires rapid and sensitive assessment. The Wong-Baker FACES pain scale (WBFPS) is a widely accepted, validated tool to assess pain in children. Our objective was to determine whether incorporation of the WBFPS into the emergency medical record (EMR) improves pain documentation in the pediatric emergency department. We also examined whether this intervention improves the management of children who present with pain.

METHODS

The WBFPS was incorporated into the EMR in an urban tertiary care pediatric emergency department. We performed a review of EMRs for patients aged 3 to 20 years at 30 days before and 30 days after the intervention. All physicians were trained to use the WBFPS. We excluded patients younger than 3 years or who were unable to perform the assessment. We compare rates of pain score documentation for the preintervention (PRE) and postintervention (POST) groups and times from triage to analgesia administration using Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

A total of 462 and 372 EMRs were included in the PRE and POST groups, respectively. The groups were similar with respect to age (P = 0.46); there were more males in the POST group (47.2% vs 56.5%, P = 0.008). The rate of pain score documentation was 7.4% (n = 34) in the PRE group and 38.2% (n = 142) in the POST group (P < 0.001). In patients with pain score of 6 or greater, there was no statistical difference in analgesia administration (PRE, 41.7% [10/24] vs POST, 41.8% [28/67]) or time to administer analgesia in minutes (PRE, 80.4%; median, 42 and POST, 100.5%; median, 52.5; P = 0.71).

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporating the WBFPS into the EMR significantly improves pain assessment in children. Despite this, there was neither improvement in analgesia administration nor reduction in time to administer analgesia in children with pain.

Race, ethnicity, and management of pain from long-bone fractures: a prospective study of two academic urban emergency departments

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to test the hypothesis that African American and Hispanic patients are less likely to receive analgesics than white patients in two academic urban emergency departments (EDs).

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study of a convenience sample of patients with long-bone fractures from April 2002 to November 2006 in two academic urban EDs. Eligibility criteria were age 18-55 years, isolated long-bone fracture, and race and ethnicity (Hispanic, African American, and white). The primary outcome was receipt of analgesics; secondary outcomes included receipt of opioids, dose, route, time to first analgesic, and change in pain. Logistic regression was used to adjust the risk of receiving analgesics for patients' initial rating of pain and demographic characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 1,239 patients with suspected long-bone fractures, 345 patients were eligible: 177 (51%) were Hispanic, 98 (28%) were African American, and 70 (20%) were white. Administration of analgesics was not associated with race or ethnicity. Sixteen percent (95% confidence interval [CI] = 11% to 22%) of Hispanic, 15% (95% CI = 10% to 24%) of African American, and 14% (95% CI = 8% to 24%) of white patients did not receive any analgesics. Seventy-four percent of Hispanic (95% CI = 67% to 80%), 66% of African American (95% CI = 57% to 75%), and 69% (95% CI = 57% to 78%) of white patients received opioid analgesics. After adjustment for covariates, there was no evidence of an association between receipt of analgesics or opioid analgesics and the race or ethnicity of the patients. There were no significant differences in time to treatment, dose, route, or change in pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Receipt of analgesics for pain from long-bone fractures was not associated with patient race or ethnicity in two academic urban EDs.

Gender disparity in analgesic treatment of emergency department patients with acute abdominal pain

OBJECTIVES

Oligoanalgesia for acute abdominal pain historically has been attributed to the provider's fear of masking serious underlying pathology. The authors assessed whether a gender disparity exists in the administration of analgesia for acute abdominal pain.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study of consecutive nonpregnant adults with acute nontraumatic abdominal pain of less than 72 hours' duration who presented to an urban emergency department (ED) from April 5, 2004, to January 4, 2005. The main outcome measures were analgesia administration and time to analgesic treatment. Standard comparative statistics were used.

RESULTS

Of the 981 patients enrolled (mean age +/- standard deviation [SD] 41 +/- 17 years; 65% female), 62% received any analgesic treatment. Men and women had similar mean pain scores, but women were less likely to receive any analgesia (60% vs. 67%, difference 7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.1% to 13.6%) and less likely to receive opiates (45% vs. 56%, difference 11%, 95% CI = 4.1% to 17.1%). These differences persisted when gender-specific diagnoses were excluded (47% vs. 56%, difference 9%, 95% CI = 2.5% to 16.2%). After controlling for age, race, triage class, and pain score, women were still 13% to 25% less likely than men to receive opioid analgesia. There was no gender difference in the receipt of nonopioid analgesia. Women waited longer to receive their analgesia (median time 65 minutes vs. 49 minutes, difference 16 minutes, 95% CI = 3.5 to 33 minutes).

CONCLUSIONS

Gender bias is a possible explanation for oligoanalgesia in women who present to the ED with acute abdominal pain. Standardized protocols for analgesic administration may ameliorate this discrepancy.

Pain prevalence and pain relief in trauma patients in the Accident & Emergency department

BACKGROUND

Acute pain in the A&E department (ED) has been described as a problem, however insight into the problem for trauma patients is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

This study describes the prevalence of pain, the pain intensity and the effect of conventional pain treatment in trauma patients in the ED.

METHODS

In a prospective cohort study of 450 trauma patients, pain was measured on admission and at discharge, using standardized and validated pain instruments.

RESULTS

The prevalence of pain was high, both on admission (91%) and at discharge (86%). Two thirds of the trauma patients reported moderate or severe pain at discharge. Few patients received pharmacological or non-pharmacological pain relieving treatment during their stay in the ED. Pain decreased in 37% of the patients, did not change at all in 46%, or had increased in 17% of the patients at discharge from the ED. The most effective pain treatment given was a combination of injury treatment and supplementary pharmacological interventions, however this treatment was given to a small group of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute pain in trauma patients is a significant problem in the ED's. Pain itself does not seem to be treated systematically and sufficiently, anywhere in the cycle of injury treatment in the ED.

Use of a triage pain protocol in the ED

PURPOSES

This study was designed to evaluate the ability of a triage pain protocol to improve frequency and time to delivery of analgesia for musculoskeletal injuries in the emergency department (ED).

BASIC PROCEDURES

Frequency and time to analgesic administration were measured before and after use of a triage pain protocol. The protocol allowed analgesic medications to be given at the time of triage.

MAIN FINDINGS

Time to medication administration was 76 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI], 68-84 minutes) before and 40 minutes (95% CI, 32-47 minutes) after the protocol. Five hundred fifty-nine (70%) of 800 patients received analgesics using the protocol compared with 212 of 471 (45%) patients prior.

PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS

Use of a triage pain protocol increased the number of patients with musculoskeletal injury who received pain medication in the ED. Use of the protocol also resulted in a decrease in the time to analgesic medication administration.

Current trends in the management of common painful conditions of preschool children in United States pediatric emergency departments

Trends in pain management practice by Pediatric Emergency Medicine fellows in the United States were described and analyzed. Self-administered surveys on pain management practices conducted among Pediatric Emergency Medicine fellows at the national Pediatric Emergency Medicine fellows' annual conference in 1996 and 2004 were compared. In comparison to the 1996 survey, the 2004 survey noted a significant increase in narcotics use for headache (6% versus 12%; P = .001), abdominal pain (4% versus 50%; P = .001), and burn patients (46% versus 68%; P = .001). There was also an increase in reported use of topical/ local anesthetics for venipuncture (6% versus 18%, P = .001) and lumbar puncture (49% versus 80%; P = .001), and ketamine for repairing lacerations (16% versus 56%; P = .001), incision and drainage (12% versus 58%; P = .001), and reduction of fractures (38% versus 79%; P = .001). The reported use of pain medication use by Pediatric Emergency Medicine fellows increased during the study period.

A randomized clinical trial of oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate versus intravenous morphine sulfate for initial control of pain in children with extremity injuries

BACKGROUND

Extremity injury is a common condition that requires pain management in an emergency department. In pediatric patients, the most frequently used method of pain control is intravenous (IV) morphine sulfate. Oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate (OTFC) is a potential alternative to morphine, which may obviate the need to place an IV before addressing pain.

OBJECTIVE

To compare OTFC with IV morphine for sedation and analgesia during initial evaluation of children with deformity of an extremity and suspected fracture.

DESIGN/METHODS

A randomized controlled trial of OTFC versus IV morphine in which 8- to 18-year-olds presenting to pediatric tertiary care emergency department with extremity deformity and suspected fracture were eligible. Only those with visual analog scale (VAS) (0 = no pain, 100 = worst pain imaginable) score equal to or greater than 50/100, and American Society of Anesthesia I or II qualified. Patients were excluded if history of loss of/altered level of consciousness, multiple traumatic injuries, or if patient had received prior medication for pain control. All patients enrolled were randomly assigned to receive either IV morphine (0.1 mg/kg) or OTFC (10-15 mug/kg). Patients rated pain intensity using VAS; scores were recorded before medicating and at 15-minute intervals after the medication was given. Adverse events such as emesis, pruritus, and respiratory depression were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 87 patients were enrolled in study (OTFC, 47; morphine, 40). There are no significant differences between the 2 groups when comparing sex, age, weight, and pretreatment VAS score (P > 0.05). Although the VAS scores were not significantly different before medicating the patient, an analysis of variance shows that there was a significant difference (P > 0.05) in VAS scores at 30 minutes. The differences persisted for every 15 minutes through the 75 minutes of monitoring. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups when comparing the number of adverse events (P = 0.23).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of OTFC can provide improved pain control when compared with IV morphine. The pain reduction starts 30 minutes after initiation of medication, and the effect is seen as far as 75 minutes after the initiation of analgesic medication. The study size was too small to make any statements concerning adverse effects; thus, further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to determine the use of OTFC.

A randomized, controlled trial of acetaminophen, ibuprofen, and codeine for acute pain relief in children with musculoskeletal trauma

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to determine which of 3 analgesics, acetaminophen, ibuprofen, or codeine, given as a single dose, provides the most efficacious analgesia for children presenting to the emergency department with pain from acute musculoskeletal injuries.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Children 6 to 17 years old with pain from a musculoskeletal injury (to extremities, neck, and back) that occurred in the preceding 48 hours before presentation in the emergency department were randomly assigned to receive orally 15 mg/kg acetaminophen, 10 mg/kg ibuprofen, or 1 mg/kg codeine. Children, parents, and the research assistants were blinded to group assignment. The primary outcome was change in pain from baseline to 60 minutes after treatment with study medication as measured by using a visual analog scale.

RESULTS

A total of 336 patients were randomly assigned, and 300 were included in the analysis of the primary outcome (100 in the acetaminophen group, 100 in the ibuprofen group, and 100 in the codeine group). Study groups were similar in age, gender, final diagnosis, previous analgesic given, and baseline pain score. Patients in the ibuprofen group had a significantly greater improvement in pain score (mean decrease: 24 mm) than those in the codeine (mean decrease: 11 mm) and acetaminophen (mean decrease: 12 mm) groups at 60 minutes. In addition, at 60 minutes more patients in the ibuprofen group achieved adequate analgesia (as defined by a visual analog scale <30 mm) than the other 2 groups. There was no significant difference between patients in the codeine and acetaminophen groups in the change in pain score at any time period or in the number of patients achieving adequate analgesia.

CONCLUSIONS

For the treatment of acute traumatic musculoskeletal injuries, ibuprofen provides the best analgesia among the 3 study medications.

Physician pain reminder as an intervention to enhance analgesia for extremity and clavicle injuries in pediatric emergency

The purpose of this study was to document analgesic use for limb and clavicle injuries in the pediatric emergency department (ED) and to determine whether a physician-oriented pain scale form on the patient's chart would enhance the administration of analgesia. Patients 3 to 18 years old were recruited prospectively in our tertiary pediatric ED in Toronto. The study included 4 crossover periods, 2 with the pain scale form on the patient's chart and 2 without. A total of 310 patients were recruited, mean age was 10 years, 64% were boys, and 62% had sustained fractures. The mean pain score was 4.4. Only 90 (29%) patients received an analgesic in the ED, and 65 (72%) of them were ordered by a physician. Only 24 (20%) in the study group and 22 (14%) in the control group received sufficient analgesia (P = .13). The median time to physician-initiated analgesia after arrival was 2.0 hours (1.0 to 3.3 hours), without a significant difference between groups. Pain control was 4-fold more appropriate in children receiving opioids versus nonopioids. Physician pain reminders did not enhance, and other measures should be taken to increase the dispensing of analgesia.

PERSPECTIVE

This is the first study to evaluate whether the addition of a physician-oriented pain-scale form on the chart of patients with injuries improves administration of analgesia in the ED. We found that physicians do not give sufficient analgesia even with this reminder form.

The gap between pediatric emergency department procedural pain management treatments available and actual practice

OBJECTIVES

To describe the spectrum of procedures performed and the pain management methods used in our pediatric emergency department.

METHODS

Encounter records were retrospectively reviewed for all patients presenting to our pediatric emergency department, a stand-alone pediatric department with 20,000 patient visits per year, located in an urban, public teaching hospital, between March and June 2004. Data collected included patient demographics, provider type, procedures performed, and pharmacological pain management methods documented used. For intravenous catheter placement, the time lag between order and placement was noted.

RESULTS

There were 1727 procedures performed in 1210 patients (18% of the total 6545 patients seen). Few to no patients undergoing venipuncture, intravenous catheter placement, fingersticks, intramuscular or subcutaneous injections, urethral catheterization, or nasogastric tube placement received pain management. The median time between order and placement of intravenous catheters was 30 minutes. Nearly all patients undergoing fracture reductions received procedural sedation with ketamine, and most of the lacerations repaired with sutures and nail avulsions received injected local anesthetic. Pain management of abscess incision and drainage and lumbar punctures was more variable. For lumbar punctures, of the patients aged 4 months or younger with a procedure note written, only 29% (7/24) had pain management documented versus 85% (22/26) of those aged 1 year or older (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Several minor painful procedures are commonly performed in the emergency department without pharmacological pain management. There remains a gap between what we know to be effective, easily implemented pain management strategies, and what is actually practiced. We must work to close this gap.

Pain after discharge: A pilot study of factors associated with pain management and functional status

INTRODUCTION

Little is known about how continued pain after discharge from the emergency department is managed by patients, and how it may interfere with the functional status of patients. The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate pain management practices, patient satisfaction with pain medications, and how continued pain after ED discharge may influence the functional status of patients who presented with chief complaints of abdominal, chronic, abscess, or trauma-related pain.

METHODS

This prospective, descriptive study was conducted at 2 Level 1 trauma hospitals. Twenty-nine patients completed an emergency department discharge questionnaire and follow-up phone survey. Data were collected via telephone interviews an average of 72 hours after discharge.

RESULTS

On emergency department discharge, patients reported pain intensity that had not decreased significantly at the time of the home interview. Most patients (78%) used ED-prescribed medications and reported a high level of satisfaction with their pain relief (7.2 +/- 2.1). Continued pain after ED discharge primarily interfered with patient's ability to work (7.3 +/- 3.8), to go outside for social activities (6.5 +/- 4.1) and to ambulate (5.0 +/- 4.1).

DISCUSSION

Patients in this study, on average, continued to experience pain for up to 96 hours after discharge from the emergency department. They reported a high level of pain relief from their ED-prescribed medications. However, interference with functions of daily living due to continued pain was substantial. Further studies are needed to examine the paradoxical reports of high satisfaction with pain relief yet substantial functional limitations experienced by patients after ED discharge.

Factors Associated With Delay to Opiate Analgesia in Emergency Departments

Patients presenting to an emergency department (ED) with painful conditions continue to experience significant delay to analgesia. It remains unclear whether demographic and clinical factors are associated with this outcome. The objectives of this study were to determine 1) the proportion of patients that require parenteral opiate analgesia for pain in an ED and who receive the opiate in less than 60 minutes; and 2) whether any factors are predictive for the first dose of analgesia being delayed beyond 60 minutes. A retrospective cohort study with descriptive and comparative data analysis was conducted. Over a 3-month period, the medical record of every patient receiving parenteral opiates in a tertiary emergency department was reviewed and analyzed. Of 857 patients, 451 (52.6%) received analgesia in less then 60 minutes. Multiple demographic and clinical factors are associated with statistically significant delay to analgesia, including age, triage code, seniority of treating doctor, diagnosis, and disposition from the ED.

PERSPECTIVE

A considerable proportion of patients suffer delay to analgesia. Identifiable factors associated with a delay to analgesia exist. There is potential for clinicians to develop strategies to address the population in emergency departments at risk for delay to analgesia.

The impact of educational intervention programs on pain management in a pediatric emergency department

Management of pain and anxiety is an important part of patient care in the pediatric emergency department (ED). Even though it has improved significantly over the past few years, it is still suboptimal. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of informal and formal education on pain and anxiety management in the pediatric ED. Management of pain and anxiety was assessed by comparing the use of analgesics and sedatives during three phases: A) year 2000 (baseline), B) years 2001-2002 (informal teaching) and C) year 2004 (following a structured simulation-based training in pediatric sedation and analgesia). During period B there was a significant increase in the yearly use of eutectic mixture of local anesthetics (EMLA) (RR=2.63, CI 1.23-5.6), ibuprofen (RR=14.16, CI 8.73-22.98), midazolam (RR=1.68, CI 1.39-2.03) and nitrous oxide (N2O) in comparison with period A, with an additional increment of the first three medicines during period C. There was no change in the use of ketamine, morphine and meperidine during period B. Whereas, during period C, a significant increase in the use of ketamine and morphine was demonstrated (RR=24.56, CI 10.71-56.3 and RR=3.07, CI 2.12-4.44, respectively), while the use of meperidine (RR=0.68, CI 0.49-0.94) and N2O (RR=0.46, 95% CI 0.32-0.67) declined significantly. Educational interventions have a clear impact on pain and anxiety management demonstrated by the subsequent change in the use of sedatives and analgesics and should be provided to pediatric ED physicians. Informal teaching affected mainly the use of milder sedatives and analgesics, while formal structured training influenced the use of opioids and dissociative agents.

Underdosing of Morphine in Comparison with Other Parenteral Opioids in an Acute Hospital: A Quality of Care Challenge

OBJECTIVE

We observed that parenteral morphine is routinely prescribed in doses that are quite low in relation to doses of alternative parenteral opioids and in comparison with published effective doses and guidelines. The present study was undertaken to determine: 1) whether different parenteral opioids are dosed equivalently; 2) which patient factors affect equianalgesic dose; and 3) which patient factors affect opioid choice.

DESIGN

At a 750-bed tertiary care, teaching hospital in Rochester, NY, patients on the medical and surgical floors and in the emergency department who received one or more doses of parenteral morphine, hydromorphone, or meperidine were identified using computerized pharmacy records. A detailed chart review was performed for each patient, recording a variety of patient variables, which were then correlated separately with opioid dose and choice.

RESULTS

Of the 293 patients treated with boluses of a parenteral opioid, 75% received morphine at a median dose of only 2 mg. Patients prescribed hydromorphone or meperidine received median equianalgesic doses that were 6.7 and 3.4 times higher, respectively. A prescriber's choice of opioid affected the equianalgesic dose more significantly than any of the patient variables studied, including active home opioid use.

CONCLUSIONS

At our institution, parenteral morphine boluses are routinely given at relatively low doses compared with: 1) other opioids; 2) patient-controlled analgesic dosing; 3) usual doses required for analgesia from previous studies; and 4) a historical control in the same hospital. The reasons for this pattern are largely unexplained by patient variables. Inadequate bolus dosing of morphine may be a barrier to appropriate patient analgesia.

Disparities in Analgesia and Opioid Prescribing Practices for Patients With Musculoskeletal Pain in the Emergency Department

INTRODUCTION

Healthy People 2010 seeks to eliminate racial and ethnic disparities in health care; however, disparities due to age and race have been described in emergency department pain treatment. Although pain is a common patient complaint in emergency departments, many people receive no analgesia. This study examined the influence of patient and provider characteristics on ED and discharge analgesia and opioid prescribing practices.

METHODS

This descriptive study used chart review of selected variables from ED patients 18 years and older who presented with musculoskeletal pain and were treated by core ED faculty. Logistic regression analyses were performed to determine whether analgesia- and opioid-prescribing disparities existed and were influenced by patient and provider characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 868 patient records were examined. Physician characteristics and wide variation in practice were the only sources of disparities in the prescription of analgesics in the emergency department, but patient characteristics including race, age, chronic pain, and trauma influenced prescription of ED opioids and discharge analgesics. No gender or financial status disparities were found. Fewer opioids and discharge analgesics were prescribed for black patients than for white patients. Younger patients, those with trauma, and those with chronic pain received more opioids and discharge analgesics compared with older patients and those without trauma or chronic pain. Providers who completed emergency medicine residencies and had fewer than 3 years' experience prescribed more analgesics in the emergency department.

DISCUSSION

Pain management in our emergency department is widely variable, with some disparities based on patient and physician characteristics. Multicenter prospective studies are needed to validate these findings and examine knowledge and attitude development about pain and its management. Protocols for nurse-initiated analgesia may help improve and standardize ED pain care.

Analgesic Use in Intubated Patients during Acute Resuscitation

BACKGROUND

Pain relief can often be overlooked during a busy trauma resuscitation, especially in patients who are intubated. We sought to investigate qualitative and quantitative aspects of analgesic use in intubated patients during the acute phase of resuscitation.

METHODS

We evaluated a retrospective cohort of consecutive adult patients who were intubated during the acute trauma resuscitation (first 6 hours) from January 2001 to May 2002 at a Level I trauma center in the United States. Patient demographics, injuries, vital signs, medications, trauma bay procedures, and disposition status were analyzed. Analgesia was recorded as the type of analgesic, route of administration, elapsed time to receive the first analgesic, total dosage, and time intervals between two successive doses. Fisher's exact test, chi test, and ANOVA were used to analyze data.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients were included. Sixty-one (51%) patients received analgesia during their stay in the emergency department. Using logistic regression analysis, patients who more likely to receive analgesia were those who did not require immediate surgical operation and were transferred to the intensive care unit (odds ratio [OR]=3.91; 95% CI=1.75-8.76) and those who were admitted during the hours of 8 am to 6 pm (OR=3.17; CI=1.40-7.16). Among those patients receiving analgesia, 30 (25%) patients received analgesia within 30 minutes upon arrival. The mean time of receiving the first analgesia dose was 57 minutes. The average morphine equivalent dose given to the patients was 15.7 mg. The most frequently given single dose was 100 mug of intravenous fentanyl. Most of the analgesics (37%) were given between 30 to 60 minutes apart.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that patients who are intubated during the acute resuscitation probably receive inadequate analgesia. The inadequacy appears to be in the timing and repetition of administration, rather than the dose. Patients who were transferred early to the intensive care unit were more likely to receive analgesics.

Effects of initial pain treatment on sedation recovery time in pediatric emergency care

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to compare the sedation recovery times of children receiving ketamine/midazolam (K/M) versus K/M and initial pain treatment (morphine or meperidine) in pediatric emergency care.

METHODS

Study method was a retrospective cross-sectional study of children receiving K/M for procedural sedation analgesia in an urban children's hospital pediatric emergency department (ED). A uniform data collection form was completed for each child.

RESULTS

During an 18-month period, 116 children received K/M for procedural sedation analgesia in the ED. For this study, 80 children met inclusion criteria: 33 patients received K/M only; 32 received K/M and morphine, and 15 received K/M and meperidine. In comparing the K/M only group with the K/M morphine and K/M meperidine groups, the mean ketamine and midazolam doses (mg/kg) were not significantly different. In comparing the recovery times (minutes) for the K/M only group (29.7; SD, 15.7) with the K/M morphine (41.1; SD, 22.4) and K/M meperidine (50.1; SD, 24.9) groups, there was a significant difference for both comparisons (95% confidence interval for difference between 2 means, -20.9 to -1.76 and -32.2 to -8.4, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Sedation (K/M) recovery time is significantly greater for children receiving initial pain treatment (morphine or meperidine). Children receiving meperidine had the longest recovery time. Considering this prolonged recovery time and the unique adverse effects of meperidine compared with morphine, we recommend meperidine not be used for initial ED pain treatment of children.

Pain management in paediatric trauma patients with long bone fracture

OBJECTIVES

This study was done to review and describe the care of paediatric trauma patients with respect to pain assessment and medication administration.

METHODS

A retrospective review of paediatric trauma patients, age <16 with a long bone fracture and GCS=15, cared for by our paediatric trauma response team (January 1998-August 2002). A single trained abstractor reviewed all records. Data were descriptively analysed.

RESULTS

Fifty-six children were included. All but three received pain medication during resuscitation. The median time to first dose of pain medication after arrival was 20 min (95% CI: 14-29 min). The median pre- and post-treatment pain scores, on a 5-point scale, were 4 and 2, respectively. Vital signs were unaffected.

CONCLUSIONS

As a group, our paediatric trauma resuscitation team did a much better job managing pain, in this segment of the population, than the preponderance of existing literature would predict.

Acute musculoskeletal pain in the emergency department: a review of the literature and implications for the advanced practice nurse

Acute pain assessment and management and their accurate documentation have been identified by The Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organization as significant components of the emergency department experience. Research studies have historically focused on the subjective perception of the physician or nurse for evidence of acute musculoskeletal pain assessment for the patient; however, the lack of interrater reliability between caregivers and patients has illustrated the need to evaluate the patient's perception of pain. A review of the literature for acute musculoskeletal pain in the emergency department shows that a patient's pain experience is often underestimated, and severity of pain often does not predict pain management. Relying on patient satisfaction surveys as a surrogate marker for effectiveness of pain management is inadequate, and factors, such as age, gender, or ethnicity, may contribute to a disparity in pain management. The purpose of this article is to review pain management practices for patients with acute musculoskeletal pain who present to the emergency department and to provide recommendations for advanced practice nurses working with this emergency department patient population. Promising areas for future research include targeting mechanisms of pain with specific medications, identifying vulnerable populations at risk for inadequate pain management, and universal use of a standardized pain rating scale.

Intravenous Morphine at 0.1 mg/kg Is Not Effective for Controlling Severe Acute Pain In the Majority of Patients

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The objective was to quantify the analgesic effect of a dose of intravenous morphine, 0.1 mg/kg, to emergency department (ED) patients presenting in acute, severe pain.

METHODS

This was a prospective convenience cohort of patients aged 21 to 65 years and presenting to an academic urban ED with acute, severe pain. Patients rated their pain intensity on a validated 11-point verbal numeric rating scale ranging from 0, "no pain," to 10, "worst possible pain," immediately before they received 0.1 mg of intravenous morphine per kilogram of body weight and 30 minutes later. The main outcome was proportion of patients whose pain decreased by less than 50% during the 30-minute interval.

RESULTS

Of 119 patients who received intravenous morphine at 0.1 mg/kg, the average age was 42 years (SD=11 years), 55% were female patients, 65% were Hispanic, 28% were black, and 7% were classified as other. The median numeric rating scale pain score at baseline was 10 (interquartile range 9 to 10). Sixty-seven percent (95% confidence interval 58% to 76%) of the patients receiving intravenous morphine at 0.1 mg/kg reported a less than 50% decrease in pain. No patient required an opioid antagonist at any time during or after the study period.

CONCLUSION

The data suggest that a 0.1 mg/kg dose of morphine may be too low to adequately control acute severe pain.

Douleur aiguë de l’enfant dans l’aide médicale d’urgence

OBJECTIVES

To assess the knowledge and skills of physicians staffing mobile intensive care units (emergency ambulances) in the management of severe acute pain in children.

METHODS

Questionnaire-based telephone interviews with emergency physicians of all urban emergency ambulance services (n=360). This questionnaire covered knowledge of procedures for assessment of pain, definition of severe acute pain and its, treatment, availability of morphine and similar drugs, local guidelines and the physicians' opinion of the national guidelines.

RESULTS

Physicians from all but one ambulance service responded. Forty-nine percent were unaware of the French Society of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care guidelines, and 63% had no local guidelines. Eight percent defined severe acute pain correctly and 10% defined the therapeutic objective correctly. Forty-seven percent used morphine (which was available for 93%), and 7% and 13% respectively followed guidelines about doses and waiting periods between administrations.

CONCLUSION

This survey showed inadequate knowledge about the management (assessment and treatment) of severe acute pain in children in prehospital emergency settings. Training in this area is essential.

The future of pain management in emergency medicine

How have we as a profession, whose number-one goal is to decrease human suffering, made pain control such a poorly discussed issue in training? From day 1 of medical school, pain and suffering need to be discussed. No clinical area should be taught without discussion of this most common and most important symptom. Although we have shown that up to 70% of our patients have pain as a part of their presenting problem, hospitalized patients also have high rates of pain, often unrecognized. Barriers need to be identified and discussed. Alternatives to medications should be as much a part of our armamentarium as caring and compassion. The future of pain control depends on this paradigm shift.

Changing attitudes about pain and pain control in emergency medicine

Oligoanalgesia continues to be a large problem in the ED. An attitude of suspicion, a culture of ignoring the problem, and an environment that is not conducive to change in practice combine to present formidable obstacles for effective pain management in the emergency setting. Overcoming these obstacles for effective analgesia in the ED is not beyond the capabilities of the individual ED, the emergency physician, or the specialty of emergency medicine. Changing the attitudes of emergency medical providers about pain assessment and management will require attention in several areas of research, education and training. Oligoanalgesia remains a global problem within emergency medicine; however, this awareness is often not felt to be present "in my ED." Individual ownership of the problem may contribute to improvements in pain control. The last 15 years have seen a substantial increase in ED research focused on pain and pain management. Continued research efforts and focused clinical application of these efforts are still required. A better understanding of patient needs and expectations for pain relief, as well as continued efforts at patient education regarding pain, will also improve our treatment of pain in the ED. Recognition by providers of the ethnic, cultural, and gender differences in the expression, reporting, and expectations for treatment of pain should also continue to be a priority in changing attitudes toward pain and pain control. These goals must be realistic within the chaotic and unpredictable environment that defines emergency medicine. Practical and time-sensitive approaches to pain and pain management will continue to bea challenge to enact and enforce in our EDs. The stigma of opioids, in combination with the transient nature of the emergency physician/patient relationship, may be the largest hurdles to overcome for effective pain management not only in the ED, but also following ED discharge. Improvement in provider education of the realities, myths, and misunderstandings of opioid management may provide insight into this problem. The consequences of oligoanalgesia in the ED are not insignificant. To improve our treatment of pain in the ED, a fundamental change in attitude toward pain and the control of pain is required. This is unlikely to occur until pain is adequately addressed and treated appropriately as a true emergency.

Pediatric pain management in the emergency department

Over the past 25 years, pediatric emergency medicine research and literature have progressively augmented our knowledge of safe and effective pediatric pain management strategies. Yet there is still much more we need to do to understand the painful experiences of children, and to develop optimal safe ways of addressing their needs within the context of a busy pediatric emergency department (ED). In this article, the authors review the history of ED pediatric pain management and sedation, discuss special considerations in pediatric pain assessment and management, review various pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic methods of alleviating pain and anxiety, and present ideas to improve the culture of the pediatric ED, so that it can achieve the goal of becoming pain-free.

Factors affecting emergency department assessment and management of pain in children

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate statewide emergency department assessment and management of pain in pediatric patients as a quality improvement initiative.

METHODS

2002 Survey of Illinois Hospital emergency department's pediatric pain assessment and management strategies, in conjunction with a retrospective chart review of children, ages 0 to 15 years, treated for an extremity fracture. Survey results were available for 123 (59.4%) hospitals; 933 charts (107 hospitals) were reviewed for pain management. Survey results were compared with practices identified by chart review.

RESULTS

Use of a pain assessment scale estimated by the survey was 92%, compared with 59% use by chart review. Use of pain assessment scales for infants was limited. Fifty percent of patients in moderate to severe pain would be offered an analgesic. Six- to 15-year-old children would be offered opioids more often than children aged 0 to 1 and 2 to 5 years. Offering higher potency narcotic analgesics was associated with patient's age, geographic location of the facility, and emergency department volume. Providing an analgesic (odds ratio 4.53, 95% confidence interval 2.89-7.10), offering supportive care (odds ratio 2.37, 95% confidence interval 1.44-3.89), and pediatric-focused annual nurse competencies (odds ratio 1.90, 95% confidence interval 1.18-3.06) correlated with reduction of the patient's pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Disparity exists between perceived and documented emergency department pain management practices for children. Quality improvement initiatives should focus on improving pain assessment in infants, treating moderate to severe pain in children of all age groups, and education of health care providers in pain management strategies. Resources should target health care processes effective in decreasing pediatric pain.

The efficacy of structured assessment and analgesia provision in the paediatric emergency department

OBJECTIVES

To ascertain if the use of a structured pain assessment tool and nurse initiated oral analgesia protocols improve uptake and time to analgesia for children presenting to the emergency department with minor or moderate musculoskeletal injuries.

METHODS

Three groups of children with peripheral limb injuries were examined to identify the rates of analgesia provision and time from attendance to analgesia provision. These groups corresponded to an initial group with no pain scoring and physician initiated analgesia, a second group with pain scoring at triage then physician initiated analgesia, and a third group with pain scoring and nurse initiated analgesia.

RESULTS

The mean time to analgesia in the initial group was 138 minutes. After initiation of triage pain assessment the mean time to analgesia was 93 minutes, there was no statistical difference between these two groups. After the introduction of nurse initiated analgesia, the time to analgesia fell to a mean of 46 minutes. The rate of analgesia provision was initially 20.5% while after the initiation of triage pain assessment the provision rate was 23%. After the initiation of nurse initiated analgesia the analgesia provision rate significantly rose to 34% of attendances.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a nurse initiated, oral analgesia protocol for treatment of children with mild to moderate injury can significantly increase analgesia provision rates and decrease time to provision of analgesia.