Assessing pain in critically ill sedated patients by using a behavioral pain scale

Pain and respiration: a systematic review

Breathing techniques are commonly used to alleviate pain. Despite their frequent use, surprisingly little is known about their efficacy as well as their underlying physiological mechanisms. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize and critically appraise the results of existing studies on the association between respiration and pain, and to highlight a potential physiological mechanism underlying the respiration-pain connection. A total of 31 publications from between 1984 and 2015 were retrieved and analyzed. These articles were classified into 4 groups: experimental and clinical studies of the effect of pain on respiration, clinical studies of the effects of breathing techniques on pain, and experimental studies of the influence of various forms of respiration on laboratory-induced pain. The findings suggest that pain influences respiration by increasing its flow, frequency, and volume. Furthermore, paced slow breathing is associated with pain reduction in some of the studies, but evidence elucidating the underlying physiological mechanisms of this effect is lacking. Here, we focus on the potential role of the cardiovascular system on the respiratory modulation of pain. Further research is definitely warranted.

Reliability of three linguistically and culturally validated pain assessment tools for sedated ICU patients by ICU nurses in Finland

Background and aims:

Pain assessment in intensive care is challenging, especially when the patients are sedated. Sedated patients who cannot communicate verbally are at risk of suffering from pain that remains unnoticed without careful pain assessment. Some tools have been developed for use with sedated patients. The Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS), the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) and the Nonverbal Adult Pain Assessment Scale (NVPS) have shown promising psychometric qualities. We translated and culturally adapted these three tools for the Finnish intensive care environment. The objective of this feasibility study was to test the reliability of the three pain assessment tools translated into Finnish for use with sedated intensive care patients.

Methods:

Six sedated intensive care patients were videorecorded while they underwent two procedures: an endotracheal suctioning was the nociceptive procedure, and the non-nociceptive treatment was creaming of the feet. Eight experts assessed the patients’ pain by observing video recordings. They assessed the pain using four instruments: the BPS, the CPOT and the NVPS, and the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) served as a control instrument. Each expert assessed the patients’ pain at five measurement points: (1) right before the procedure, (2) during the endotracheal suctioning, (3) during rest (4) during the creaming of the feet, and (5) after 20 min of rest. Internal consistency and inter-rater reliability of the tools were evaluated. After 6 months, the video recordings were evaluated for testing the test-retest reliability.

Results:

Using the BPS, the CPOT, the NVPS and the NRS, 960 assessments were obtained. Internal consistency with Cronbach’s alpha coefficient varied greatly with all the instruments. The lowest values were seen at those measurement points where the pain scores were 0. The highest scores were achieved after the endotracheal suctioning at rest: for the BPS, the score was 0.86; for the CPOT, 0.96; and for the NVPS, 0.90. The inter-rater reliability using the Shrout-Fleiss intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) tests showed the best results after the painful procedure and during the creaming. The scores were slightly lower for the BPS compared to the CPOT and the NVPS. The test-retest results using the Bland-Altman plots show that all instruments gave similar results.

Conclusions:

To our knowledge, this is the first time all three behavioral pain assessment tools have been evaluated in the same study in a language other than English or French. All three tools had good internal consistency, but it was better for the CPOT and the NVPS compared to the BPS. The inter-rater reliability was best for the NVPS. The test-retest reliability was strongest for the CPOT. The three tools proved to be reliable for further testing in clinical use.

Implications:

There is a need for feasible, valid and reliable pain assessment tools for pain assessment of sedated ICU patients in Finland. This was the first time the psychometric properties of these tools were tested in Finnish use. Based on the results, all three instruments could be tested further in clinical use for sedated ICU patients in Finland.

Comparison of Self-Reported and Behavioral Pain Assessment Tools in Critically Ill Patients

BACKGROUND

Self-reported and behavioral pain assessment scales are often used interchangeably in critically ill patients due to fluctuations in mental status. The correlation between scales is not well elucidated. The purpose of this study was to describe the correlation between self-reported and behavioral pain scores in critically ill patients.

METHODS

Pain was assessed using behavioral and self-reported pain assessment tools. Behavioral pain tools included Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) and Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS). Self-reported pain tools included Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and Wong-Baker Faces Pain Scales. Delirium was assessed using the confusion assessment method for the intensive care unit. Patient preference regarding pain assessment method was queried. Correlation between scores was evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 115 patients were included: 67 patients were nondelirious and 48 patients were delirious. The overall correlation between self-reported (NRS) and behavioral (CPOT) pain scales was poor (0.30, P = .018). In patients without delirium, a strong correlation was found between the 2 behavioral pain scales (0.94, P < .0001) and 2 self-reported pain scales (0.77, P < .0001). Self-reported pain scale (NRS) and behavioral pain scale (CPOT) were poorly correlated with each other (0.28, P = .021). In patients with delirium, there was a strong correlation between behavioral pain scales (0.86, P < .0001) and a moderate correlation between self-reported pain scales (0.69, P < .0001). There was no apparent correlation between self-reported (NRS) and behavioral pain scales (CPOT) in patients with delirium (0.23, P = .12). Most participants preferred self-reported pain assessment.

CONCLUSION

Self-reported pain scales and behavioral pain scales cannot be used interchangeably. Current validated behavioral pain scales may not accurately reflect self-reported pain in critically ill patients.

Measuring Acute Pain Over Time in the Critically Ill Using the Multidimensional Objective Pain Assessment Tool (MOPAT)

BACKGROUND

A valid and reliable instrument is needed to assess acute pain in critically ill patients unable to self-report and who may be transitioning between critical care and other settings.

AIM

To examine the reliability, validity, and clinical utility of the Multidimensional Objective Pain Assessment Tool (MOPAT) when used over time by critical care nurses to assess acute pain in non-communicative critically ill patients.

METHODS

Twenty-seven patients had pain assessed at two time points (T1 and T2) surrounding a painful event for up to 3 days. Twenty-one ICU nurses participated in pain assessments and completed the Clinical Utility Questionnaire.

RESULTS

Internal consistency reliability coefficient alphas for the MOPAT were .68 at T1 and .72 at T2. Inter-rater agreement during painful procedures or turning was 68% for the behavioral dimension and 80% for the physiologic dimension. Validity was evidenced by decreases (p < .001) in the MOPAT total and behavioral and physiologic dimension scores when comparing T1 and T2. Nurses found the tool clinically useful.

CONCLUSION

The MOPAT can be used in the critical care setting as a helpful tool to assess pain in non-communicative patients. The MOPAT is unique in that the instrument can be used over time and across settings.

Head movements and postures as pain behavior

Pain assessment can benefit from observation of pain behaviors, such as guarding or facial expression, and observational pain scales are widely used in clinical practice with nonverbal patients. However, little is known about head movements and postures in the context of pain. In this regard, we analyze videos of three publically available datasets. The BioVid dataset was recorded with healthy participants subjected to painful heat stimuli. In the BP4D dataset, healthy participants performed a cold-pressor test and several other tasks (meant to elicit emotion). The UNBC dataset videos show shoulder pain patients during range-of-motion tests to their affected and unaffected limbs. In all videos, participants were sitting in an upright position. We studied head movements and postures that occurred during the painful and control trials by measuring head orientation from video over time, followed by analyzing posture and movement summary statistics and occurrence frequencies of typical postures and movements. We found significant differences between pain and control trials with analyses of variance and binomial tests. In BioVid and BP4D, pain was accompanied by head movements and postures that tend to be oriented downwards or towards the pain site. We also found differences in movement range and speed in all three datasets. The results suggest that head movements and postures should be considered for pain assessment and research. As additional pain indicators, they possibly might improve pain management whenever behavior is assessed, especially in nonverbal individuals such as infants or patients with dementia. However, in advance more research is needed to identify specific head movements and postures in pain patients.

Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine versus Ketofol for Sedation of Postoperative Mechanically Ventilated Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Patients with sleep apnea are prone to postoperative respiratory complications, requiring restriction of sedatives during perioperative care. We performed a prospective randomized study on 24 patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) who underwent elective surgery under general anesthesia. The patients were equally divided into two groups: Group Dex: received dexmedetomidine loading dose 1 mcg/kg IV over 10 min followed by infusion of 0.2–0.7 mcg/kg/hr; Group KFL: received ketofol as an initial bolus dose 500 mcg/kg IV (ketamine/propofol 1 : 1) and maintenance dose of 5–10 mcg/kg/min. Sedation level (Ramsay sedation score), bispectral index (BIS), duration of mechanical ventilation, surgical intensive care unit (SICU) stay, and mean time to extubation were evaluated. Complications (hypotension, hypertension, bradycardia, postextubation apnea, respiratory depression, and desaturation) and number of patients requiring reintubation were recorded. There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups in BIS at the third hour only (Group DEX 63.00 ± 3.542 and Group KFL 66.42 ± 4.010, p value = 0.036). Duration of mechanical ventilation, SICU stay, and extubation time showed no statistically significant differences. No complications were recorded in both groups. Thus, dexmedetomidine was associated with lesser duration of mechanical ventilation and time to extubation than ketofol, but these differences were not statistically significant.

Comparison between Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool and physiologic indicators for pain assessment in the critically ill, mechanically ventilated adult patients

Background and Objectives:

Pain assessment of nonverbal, critically ill patients continues to present a challenge in Intensive Care Unit (ICU). The Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) rates critically ill patients’ pain based on clinical observation. In the present study, the accuracy of CPOT was compared with physiological indicators of pain in mechanically ventilated, critically ill patients.

Methods:

This quantitative prospective observational study was conducted to assess pain in the critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients in comparison to physiologic indicators such as blood pressure and heart rate. A repeated measures design was chosen, and a sample size of 180 was taken from 60 patients with sepsis, acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, community-acquired pneumonia, and postsurgical patients in the ICU. The two painful procedures chosen were tracheal suction and patient positioning. The data were collected at rest, at tracheal suctioning, 20 min later at positioning of the patient, and final reading 20 min later. Three testing periods, each including 4 assessments for a total of 12 pain assessments with sixty patients, were completed during each patient's ICU course. A total of six assessments were done with the patient at rest and three each with pain stimulus of tracheal suctioning and patient positioning.

Results:

There was a significant increase in both hemodynamic variables (systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure) during painful procedures except for the heart rate during positioning. The correlation between the CPOT and Ramsay scale was negative and significant.

Conclusions:

The present study provides evidence that the CPOT has good psychometric properties. It might prove useful for pain assessment in uncommunicative critically ill patients.

Thermal camera as a pain monitor

Objectives

Today, many subjective methods are used to measure pain. Wong Baker and Hicks Facial Pain Scale is one of the most commonly used method. Clinicians grade pain according to the facial mimetic reaction of the patient. Unfortunately, there is no objective measure for monitoring pain. By using the same principle of the Wong Baker and Hicks Facial Pain Scale, in this study, we aimed to objectively measure pain by using a thermal camera to detect instant facial temperature changes.

Materials and methods

Thirty volunteers who attended blood collection unit were subjected to facial thermal monitoring and measurements were obtained 5 minutes before needle puncture (BNP), during needle puncture (DNP), and after needle puncture (ANP). Data were processed with TestoIRSoft 3.8 software program and mean temperatures of the whole face (FFM) and highest temperature points (HP), horizontal line (HOR) between two pupils and first glabellar wrinkle, and bilateral lines starting from the nasolabial sulcus to oral commissure (NLS-1 at right, NLS-2 at left) were evaluated. All data were statistically analyzed with paired sample t-test.

Results

Statistically, temperature measurements of HOR, NLS-1, NLS-2, HP, and FFM were significantly higher between BNP and DNP, significantly lower between ANP and DNP, and significantly higher between BNP and ANP (p<0.05). The most interesting result in our analysis was that the HP point was between the two eyebrows in 26 of the 30 volunteers.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that a thermal camera can be used to objectively monitor pain and in follow-up. However, further studies involving non-healthy volunteers (especially high-fever patients, children, immunosuppressive patients, and cancer and intensive care patients) should be performed.

Validation of the Italian version of the Critical Pain Observation Tool in brain-injured critically ill adults

Background and aim: Pain in intensive care units (ICUs) is a frequent and often undermanaged problem. Brain-injured patients are often unable to reliably self-report their pain, calling forth the need to use behavioural scales such as the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT). This study aimed to test the reliability and validity of the Italian CPOT use with brain-injured ICU adults. Method: A sample of 50 adults critical care patients was included. Each patient was assessed by two independent observers at three predefined times – at rest; during mobilization for hygiene; 20 minutes later – using the CPOT, PAINAD, and NRS. Results: A good correlation was found between independent observers scores during painful procedure, establishing interrater reliability of CPOT. Criterion validation was supported by a strong correlation between CPOT and PAINAD scores, and a moderate relation between CPOT and NRS scores. The CPOT was able to discriminate between patients undergoing painful versus non-painful procedures. However, PAINAD performed better in this sample, as revealed by the comparison between the two AUC of ROC curves. Conclusions: The Italian CPOT use was found reliable and valid in this patient group.

High-Definition transcranial direct current stimulation in early onset epileptic encephalopathy: a case study

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE

Early onset epileptic encephalopathy is characterized by high daily seizure-frequency, multifocal epileptic discharges, severe psychomotor retardation, and death at infancy. Currently, there are no effective treatments to alleviate seizure frequency and high-voltage epileptic discharges in these catastrophic epilepsy cases. The current study examined the safety and feasibility of High-Definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) in reducing epileptiform activity in a 30-month-old child suffering from early onset epileptic encephalopathy.

DESIGN AND METHODS

HD-tDCS was administered over 10 intervention days spanning two weeks including pre- and post-intervention video-EEG monitoring.

RESULTS

There were no serious adverse events or side effects related to the HD-tDCS intervention. Frequency of clinical seizures was not significantly reduced. However, interictal sharp wave amplitudes were significantly lower during the post-intervention period versus baseline. Vital signs and blood biochemistry remained stable throughout the entire study.

CONCLUSIONS

These exploratory findings support the safety and feasibility of 4 × 1 HD-tDCS in early onset epileptic encephalopathy and provide the first evidence of HD-tDCS effects on paroxysmal EEG features in electroclinical cases under the age of 36 months. Extending HD-tDCS treatment may enhance electrographic findings and clinical effects.

Content validation of behaviours and autonomic responses for the assessment of pain in critically ill adults with a brain injury

BACKGROUND

The evidence shows that brain-injured patients express behaviours that are related to their level of consciousness (LOC), and different from other patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Therefore, existing behavioural scales should be revised to enhance their content and validity for use in these patients.

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to evaluate the content relevance of behaviours and autonomic responses for pain assessment of brain-injured ICU patients from the perspective of critical care clinicians.

METHODS

A total of 77 clinicians from four adult neuroscience ICUs (three from Canada and one from the United States) participated in this descriptive study. A physician/nurse ratio of 21% (13/61) was reached in this quota sample, and three physiotherapists also participated. They completed a content validation questionnaire of 19 items rated on clarity and relevance based on the patient's LOC. Item Content Validity Index (I-CVI), and modified kappa (κ*) were calculated. Values higher than 0.78 and 0.75 respectively were considered excellent.

RESULTS

Regardless of the patient's LOC, brow lowering, grimacing, and trying to reach the pain site were rated as the most relevant behaviours by clinicians, with excellent values of I-CVI>0.78 and κ*>0.75. Eyes tightly closed, moaning and verbal complaints of pain also obtained excellent values in altered LOC and conscious patients. Eye weeping obtained excellent values only in conscious patients. Other items showed fair (0.40-0.59) to good (0.60-0.74) values, while blinking and coughing showed poor values (<0.40) at various LOC.

CONCLUSIONS

Facial expressions, movements towards the pain site, and vocalisation of pain were the most relevant pain-related behaviours rated by critical care clinicians. The relevance of some behaviours (e.g., moaning and verbal complaints of pain) varied across LOCs, thereby calling forth adaptations of behavioural pain scales to allow for interpretation in the context of a patient's LOC and ability to express specific behaviours.

Association Between Acute Pain and Hemodynamic Parameters in a Postoperative Surgical Intensive Care Unit

I conducted a prospective repeated-measure study in the general surgery intensive care unit to investigate the associations among acute postoperative pain, analgesic therapy, and hemodynamic parameters. I selected 33 patients and recorded 84 episodes of pain. I measured intensity of pain and hemodynamic parameters after patients were transferred from the postanesthesia care unit to the general surgery intensive care unit, immediately before analgesic therapy and at 15, 30, and 45 minutes after analgesic therapy. Acute pain increased systolic (SBP), diastolic (DBP), and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP); pulse rate (PR); and arterial oxygen saturation. Fifteen minutes after analgesic therapy, SBP and PR decreased, and DBP, MAP, and oxygen saturation increased. Thirty minutes after therapy, SBP, MAP, and PR decreased, and DBP and oxygen saturation increased. Forty-five minutes after therapy, SBP, MAP, and PR decreased, and DBP and oxygen saturation increased. I saw no significant hemodynamic parameter changes during postoperative episodes of pain.

A prospective, observational, longitudinal cohort study of sedation practices in SGH intensive care units

Background:

Critically ill patients require sedation for patient comfort and ventilator synchrony. Despite the extensive use of sedation, to date there is no consensus on the best sedation practices. We attempt to investigate our local sedation practices.

Method:

This was a single-centre prospective, observation cohort study in medical and surgical intensive care unit (ICU) patients who were ventilated and sedated for more than 24 hours. Baseline demographics were obtained and patients followed-up for 28 days or to ICU discharge. Details on sedatives, ventilation duration, vasopressors and renal replacement therapy use, hospital/ICU length of stay, mortality, delirium, and sedation depth were collected and analysed.

Results:

From March to July 2012, 58 patients were recruited with a mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score of 20.2 ±8.5. Hospital mortality rates were 32.8%. Patients were followed-up for 387 ICU patient-days. In the early period (first 48 h), the most popular sedative used was propofol (74.1%), followed by morphine (29.3%). In the subsequent period (>48 h), most patients were not sedated (47.6%); morphine became the most popular sedation drug (32.5%) followed by propofol (31%). Ketamine, haloperidol and diazepam were not given. In total, 1994 Richmond Agitation and Sedation Score (RASS) assessments were performed over 387 ICU patient-days; 11.1% of RASS assessments were prescribed a sedation target, and 86% of them met the prescribed targets. Delirium was observed in 22.4% of patients. Compared with medical patients, surgical patients were more likely to be prescribed a sedation target (14.2% vs. 7.4%, p<0.01), require lower doses of sedation, have a RASS score of between −2 to 1 (84.8% vs. 72.3%, p<0.01) and have fewer incidences of delirium (4.1% vs. 12.1%, p=0.01).

Conclusion:

Propofol and morphine were the most commonly prescribed sedatives. Different sedation practices between units may contribute to a reduction in delirium incidence.

Terminal weaning or immediate extubation for withdrawing mechanical ventilation in critically ill patients (the ARREVE observational study)

PURPOSE

The relative merits of immediate extubation versus terminal weaning for mechanical ventilation withdrawal are controversial, particularly regarding the experience of patients and relatives.

METHODS

This prospective observational multicentre study (ARREVE) was done in 43 French ICUs to compare terminal weaning and immediate extubation, as chosen by the ICU team. Terminal weaning was a gradual decrease in the amount of ventilatory assistance and immediate extubation was extubation without any previous decrease in ventilatory assistance. The primary outcome was posttraumatic stress symptoms (Impact of Event Scale Revised, IES-R) in relatives 3 months after the death. Secondary outcomes were complicated grief, anxiety, and depression symptoms in relatives; comfort of patients during the dying process; and job strain in staff.

RESULTS

We enrolled 212 (85.5%) relatives of 248 patients with terminal weaning and 190 relatives (90.5%) of 210 patients with immediate extubation. Immediate extubation was associated with airway obstruction and a higher mean Behavioural Pain Scale score compared to terminal weaning. In relatives, IES-R scores after 3 months were not significantly different between groups (31.9 ± 18.1 versus 30.5 ± 16.2, respectively; adjusted difference, -1.9; 95% confidence interval, -5.9 to 2.1; p = 0.36); neither were there any differences in complicated grief, anxiety, or depression scores. Assistant nurses had lower job strain scores in the immediate extubation group.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to terminal weaning, immediate extubation was not associated with differences in psychological welfare of relatives when each method constituted standard practice in the ICU where it was applied. Patients had more airway obstruction and gasps with immediate extubation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01818895.

"Pain relieved, but still struggling"-Critically ill patients experiences of pain and other discomforts during analgosedation

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To explore how critically ill patients treated according to a strategy of analgosedation experience and handle pain, other discomforts and wakefulness.

BACKGROUND

Patients experience both pain and discomfort while in the intensive care unit. International guidelines recommend focused pain treatment and light sedation. An analgosedation protocol favouring pain management, light sedation and early mobilisation was implemented in our university hospital medical and surgical intensive care unit in Norway in 2014. The analgosedation approach may affect patients' experiences of the intensive care unit stay.

DESIGN

Exploratory, descriptive design using semi-structured interviews.

METHOD

Eighteen adult patients treated in intensive care unit >24 hr and receiving mechanical ventilation were interviewed 1-9 days after intensive care unit discharge. Ten patients were re-interviewed after 3 months. Data were analysed using the "systematic text condensation" approach.

FINDINGS

Four main categories emerged from the analysis: "In discomfort, but rarely in pain," "Struggling to get a grip on reality," "Holding on" and "Handling emotionally trapped experiences." "Pain relieved, but still struggling" was the overarching theme. Analgosedation provided good pain relief, but patients still described frequent physical and psychological discomforts, in particular related to mechanical ventilation, not understanding what was going on, and experiences of delusions. To come to terms with their intensive care unit stay, patients needed to participate, trust in others and endure suffering. After hospital discharge, patients described both repression of experiences and searching for recognition of what they had gone through.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Despite good pain relief during analgosedation, other discomforts were commonly described. Critically ill patients still experience an intensive care unit stay as a traumatic part of their illness trajectory. Nurses need to attend carefully also to discomforts other than pain.

Analgosedation of adult patients with elevated intracranial pressure : Survey of current clinical practice in Austria

BACKGROUND

Analgesia and sedation are key items in intensive care. Recently published S3 guidelines specifically address treatment of patients with elevated intracranial pressure.

METHODS

The Austrian Society of Anesthesiology, Resuscitation and Intensive Care Medicine carried out an online survey of neurointensive care units in Austria in order to evaluate the current state of practice in the areas of analgosedation and delirium management in this high-risk patient group.

RESULTS

The response rate was 88%. Induction of anesthesia in patients with elevated intracranial pressure is carried out with propofol/fentanyl/rocuronium in >80% of the intensive care units (ICU), 60% use midazolam, 33.3% use esketamine, 13.3% use barbiturates and 6.7% use etomidate. For maintenance of analgosedation up to 72 h, propofol is used by 80% of the ICUs, followed by remifentanil (46.7%), sufentanil (40%) and fentanyl (6.7%). For long-term sedation, 86.7% of ICUs use midazolam, 73.3% sufentanil and 73.3% esketamine. For sedation periods longer than 7 days, 21.4% of ICUs use propofol. Reasons for discontinuing propofol are signs of rhabdomyolysis (92.9%), green urine, elevated liver enzymes (71.4% each) and elevated triglycerides (57.1%). Muscle relaxants are only used during invasive procedures. Inducing a barbiturate coma is rated as a last resort by 53.3% of respondents. The monitoring methods used are bispectral index (BIS™, 61.5% of ICUs), somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEP, 53.8%), processed electroencephalography (EEG, 38.5%), intraparenchymal partial pressure of oxygen (pO₂, 38.5%) and microdialysis (23.1%). Sedation and analgesia are scored using the Richmond agitation and sedation score (RASS, 86.7%), sedation agitation scale (SAS, 6.7%) or numeric rating scale (NRS, 50%) and behavioral pain scale (BPS, 42.9%), visual analogue scale (VAS), critical care pain observation tool (CCPOT, each 14.3%) and verbal rating scale (VRS, 7.1%). Delirium monitoring is done using the confusion assessment method for intensive care units (CAM-ICU, 46.2%) and intensive care delirium screening checklist (ICDSC, 7.7%). Of the ICUs 46.2% do not carry out delirium monitoring.

CONCLUSION

We found good general compliance with the recommendations of the current S3 guidelines. Room for improvement exists in monitoring and the use of scores to detect delirium.

Intraoperative ketamine for prevention of postoperative delirium or pain after major surgery in older adults: an international, multicentre, double-blind, randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a common and serious postoperative complication. Subanaesthetic ketamine is often administered intraoperatively for postoperative analgesia, and some evidence suggests that ketamine prevents delirium. The primary purpose of this trial was to assess the effectiveness of ketamine for prevention of postoperative delirium in older adults.

METHODS

The Prevention of Delirium and Complications Associated with Surgical Treatments [PODCAST] study is a multicentre, international randomised trial that enrolled adults older than 60 years undergoing major cardiac and non-cardiac surgery under general anaesthesia. Using a computer-generated randomisation sequence we randomly assigned patients to one of three groups in blocks of 15 to receive placebo (normal saline), low-dose ketamine (0·5 mg/kg), or high dose ketamine (1·0 mg/kg) after induction of anaesthesia, before surgical incision. Participants, clinicians, and investigators were blinded to group assignment. Delirium was assessed twice daily in the first 3 postoperative days using the Confusion Assessment Method. We did analyses by intention-to-treat and assessed adverse events. This trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT01690988.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 6, 2014, and June 26, 2016, 1360 patients were assessed, and 672 were randomly assigned, with 222 in the placebo group, 227 in the 0·5 mg/kg ketamine group, and 223 in the 1·0 mg/kg ketamine group. There was no difference in delirium incidence between patients in the combined ketamine groups and the placebo group (19·45% vs 19·82%, respectively; absolute difference 0·36%, 95% CI -6·07 to 7·38, p=0·92). There were more postoperative hallucinations (p=0·01) and nightmares (p=0·03) with increasing ketamine doses compared with placebo. Adverse events (cardiovascular, renal, infectious, gastrointestinal, and bleeding), whether viewed individually (p value for each >0·40) or collectively (36·9% in placebo, 39·6% in 0·5 mg/kg ketamine, and 40·8% in 1·0 mg/kg ketamine groups, p=0·69), did not differ significantly across groups.

INTERPRETATION

A single subanaesthetic dose of ketamine did not decrease delirium in older adults after major surgery, and might cause harm by inducing negative experiences.

FUNDING

National Institutes of Health and Cancer Center Support.

Evaluating Patient-Centered Outcomes in Clinical Trials of Procedural Sedation, Part 1 Efficacy: Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research Recommendations

The Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research, established by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks public-private partnership with the US Food and Drug Administration, convened a meeting of sedation experts from a variety of clinical specialties and research backgrounds with the objective of developing recommendations for procedural sedation research. Four core outcome domains were recommended for consideration in sedation clinical trials: (1) safety, (2) efficacy, (3) patient-centered and/or family-centered outcomes, and (4) efficiency. This meeting identified core outcome measures within the efficacy and patient-centered and/or family-centered domains. Safety will be addressed in a subsequent meeting, and efficiency will not be addressed at this time. These measures encompass depth and levels of sedation, proceduralist and patient satisfaction, patient recall, and degree of pain experienced. Consistent use of the recommended outcome measures will facilitate the comprehensive reporting across sedation trials, along with meaningful comparisons among studies and interventions in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Pain Assessment in INTensive care (PAINT): an observational study of physician-documented pain assessment in 45 intensive care units in the United Kingdom

Pain is a common and distressing symptom experienced by intensive care patients. Assessing pain in this environment is challenging, and published guidelines have been inconsistently implemented. The Pain Assessment in INTensive care (PAINT) study aimed to evaluate the frequency and type of physician pain assessments with respect to published guidelines. This observational service evaluation considered all pain and analgesia-related entries in patients' records over a 24-h period, in 45 adult intensive care units (ICUs) in London and the South-East of England. Data were collected from 750 patients, reflecting the practice of 362 physicians. Nearly two-thirds of patients (n = 475, 64.5%, 95%CI 60.9-67.8%) received no physician-documented pain assessment during the 24-h study period. Just under one-third (n = 215, 28.6%, 95%CI 25.5-32.0%) received no nursing-documented pain assessment, and over one-fifth (n = 159, 21.2%, 95%CI 19.2-23.4)% received neither a doctor nor a nursing pain assessment. Two of the 45 ICUs used validated behavioural pain assessment tools. The likelihood of receiving a physician pain assessment was affected by the following factors: the number of nursing assessments performed; whether the patient was admitted as a surgical patient; the presence of tracheal tube or tracheostomy; and the length of stay in ICU. Physician-documented pain assessments in the majority of participating ICUs were infrequent and did not utilise recommended behavioural pain assessment tools. Further research to identify factors influencing physician pain assessment behaviour in ICU, such as human factors or cultural attitudes, is urgently needed.

Epidural analgesia in critically ill patients with acute pancreatitis: the multicentre randomised controlled EPIPAN study protocol

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is associated with high morbidity and mortality in its most severe forms. Most patients with severe AP require intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation, frequently for more than 7 days, which is associated with the worst outcome. Recent increasing evidence from preclinical and clinical studies support the beneficial effects of epidural analgesia (EA) in AP, such as increased gut barrier function and splanchnic, pancreatic and renal perfusion, decreased liver damage and inflammatory response, and reduced mortality. Because recent studies suggest that EA might be a safe procedure in the critically ill, we sought to determine whether EA reduced AP-associated respiratory failure and other major clinical outcomes in patients with AP.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Epidural Analgesia for Pancreatitis (EPIPAN) trial is an investigator-initiated, prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled two-arm trial with assessor-blinded outcome assessment. The EPIPAN trial will randomise 148 patients with AP requiring admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) to receive EA (with patient-controlled epidural administration of ropivacaine and sufentanil) combined with standard care based on current recommendations on the treatment of AP (interventional group), or standard care alone (reference group). The primary outcome is the number of ventilator-free days at day 30. Secondary outcomes include main complications of AP (eg, organ failure and mortality, among others), levels of biological markers of systemic inflammation, epithelial lung injury, renal failure, and healthcare-associated costs.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the appropriate ethics committee (CPP Sud-Est VI). Informed consent is required. If the combined application of EA and standard care proves superior to standard care alone in patients with AP in the ICU, the use of EA may become standard practice in experienced centres, thereby decreasing potential complications related to AP and its burden in critically ill patients. The results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02126332.

Patient Recollection of ICU Procedural Pain and Post ICU Burden: The Memory Study

OBJECTIVE

To assess patients' recollections of in-ICU procedural pain and its impact on post-ICU burden.

DESIGN

Prospective longitudinal study of patients who underwent ICU procedures.

SETTING

Thirty-four ICUs in France and Belgium.

PATIENTS

Two hundred thirty-six patients who had undergone ICU procedures.

INTERVENTION

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Patients were interviewed 3-16 months after hospitalization about: 1) recall of procedural pain intensity and pain distress (on 0-10 numeric rating scale); 2) current pain; that is, having pain in the past week that was not present before hospitalization; and 3) presence of traumatic stress (Impact of Events Scale). For patients who could rate recalled procedural pain intensity (n = 56) and pain distress (n = 43), both were significantly higher than their median (interquartile range) in ICU procedural pain scores (pain intensity: 5 [4-7] vs 3 [2.5-5], p < 0.001; pain distress: 5 [2-6] vs 2 [0-6], p = 0.003, respectively.) Current pain was reported in 14% of patients. When comparing patients with and without current pain, patients with current pain recalled even greater ICU procedural pain intensity and pain distress scores than patients without current pain: pain intensity, 8 (6-8) versus 5 (3.25-7); p = 0.002 and pain distress, 7 (5-8) versus 4 (2-6); p = 0.01, respectively. Patients with current pain also had significantly higher Impact of Events Scale scores than those without current pain (8.5 [3.5-24] vs 2 [0-10]; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Many patients remembered ICU, with far fewer able to rate procedure-associated pain. For those able to do so, recalled pain intensity and pain distress scores were significantly greater than reported in ICU. One in seven patients was having current pain, recalling even higher ICU procedural pain scores and greater traumatic stress when compared with patients without current pain. Studies are needed to assess the impact of ICU procedural pain on post-ICU pain recall, pain status over time, and the relationship between postdischarge pain status and post-ICU burden.

Pain Assessment in Noncommunicative Adult Palliative Care Patients

Palliative care patients who have pain are often unable to self-report their pain, placing them at increased risk for underrecognized and undertreated pain. Use of appropriate pain assessment tools significantly enhances the likelihood of effective pain management and improved pain-related outcomes. This paper reviews selected tools and provides palliative care clinicians with a practical approach to selecting a pain assessment tool for noncommunicative adult patients.

The Behavior Pain Assessment Tool for critically ill adults: a validation study in 28 countries

Many critically ill adults are unable to communicate their pain through self-report. The study purpose was to validate the use of the 8-item Behavior Pain Assessment Tool (BPAT) in patients hospitalized in 192 intensive care units from 28 countries. A total of 4812 procedures in 3851 patients were included in data analysis. Patients were assessed with the BPAT before and during procedures by 2 different raters (mostly nurses and physicians). Those who were able to self-report were asked to rate their pain intensity and pain distress on 0 to 10 numeric rating scales. Interrater reliability of behavioral observations was supported by moderate (0.43-0.60) to excellent (>0.60) kappa coefficients. Mixed effects multilevel logistic regression models showed that most behaviors were more likely to be present during the procedure than before and in less sedated patients, demonstrating discriminant validation of the tool use. Regarding criterion validation, moderate positive correlations were found during procedures between the mean BPAT scores and the mean pain intensity (r = 0.54) and pain distress (r = 0.49) scores (P < 0.001). Regression models showed that all behaviors were significant predictors of pain intensity and pain distress, accounting for 35% and 29% of their total variance, respectively. A BPAT cut-point score >3.5 could classify patients with or without severe levels (≥8) of pain intensity and distress with sensitivity and specificity findings ranging from 61.8% to 75.1%. The BPAT was found to be reliable and valid. Its feasibility for use in practice and the effect of its clinical implementation on patient pain and intensive care unit outcomes need further research.

Video education for critical care nurses to assess pain with a behavioural pain assessment tool: A descriptive comparative study

AIM

To evaluate the impact of video education on critical care nurses' knowledge and skills in using a behavioural pain assessment tool for intensive care patients and to explore the nurses' experiences with video education.

METHODS

Forty-eight nurses in one intensive care unit watched an educational video on the use of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool, then assessed pain in two patients with the tool and took a knowledge test. The researcher made parallel pain assessments. Interrater reliability of patients' pain assessment between nurses and the researcher was determined to examine nurses' skills in using the tool after education. Twenty nurses were interviewed about their experiences with the video education. Interviews were analysed with deductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The knowledge test scores indicated that the nurses learned the principles of how to use the tool. The interrater reliability of pain assessments reached a moderate level of agreement during the painful procedure, with a weighted kappa coefficient value of 0.48, CL [0.37, 0.58]. The nurses perceived video education positively, but requested additional interaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Video education is useful in teaching the principles of using a pain assessment tool. Additional clinical training is required for nurses to reach adequate skills in using the tool.

[Customised early mobilisation : How about a little bit more?]

Early mobilisation of patients in intensive care starts in a multiprofessional team with passive techniques continuing with assistive measures and finally going on to active training including mobilisation leading to sitting and standing positions as well as walking. Positive effects regarding these procedures have been proved in numerous studies and can also be found in the revision of the S2e guideline "Positioning and early mobilisation in prophylaxis or therapy of pulmonary disorders". In order to work with regard to the resources of the patient in intensive care, of the multiprofessional team, of the ward-specific structures and of the used equipment it is vital to apply a customised mobilisation concept. Consequently, intensive care medicine is personalised which means that the patient's needs are determined and precisely met. This and the patient's present physical capacity lead to the adaptation of nursing and therapeutic measures respectively. Some treatment methods and principles of training theory can be applied to the intensive care patient if beforehand the patient's current condition is evaluated by means of specific assessment methods. As a result, appropriate forms of therapy and adequate stimuli of training can be derived. The aim is a continuous process of early mobilisation with the best possible outcome guaranteed by a closed system of evaluation and re-evaluation.

An Integrative Review of the Literature on Pain Management Barriers: Implications for the Canadian Clinical Context

Despite decades of pain research, substandard pain management continues to be distressingly prevalent across health-care settings. This integrative literature review analyzes and synthesizes barriers to effective pain management and identifies areas for future investigation in a Canadian context. Three sets of key barriers were identified through thematic analysis of 24 original research studies published in the period 2003-13: patient, professional, and organizational. These barriers rarely occurred in isolation, with many studies reporting examples in all three categories. This suggests that interventions need to reflect the multifactorial nature of pain management. Reframing pain education as a public health initiative could lead to sustainable improvement, as could the strengthening of partnerships between patients and health-care providers. There are tremendous opportunities for the advanced practice nurse to take a lead in pain management. The delivery of high-quality care that encompasses effective pain management strategies must be a priority for nursing. Research approaches, such as pragmatic mixed methods, that offer contextual understanding of how pain is managed are suggested.

Factors affecting pain assessment scores in patients on mechanical ventilation

OBJECTIVE

To determine how respiratory status and other aspects of the patients' condition affect pain assessments.

METHODS

　Pain was assessed in 20 patients aged ≥20 years who underwent cardiovascular surgery, and required postoperative mechanical ventilation in an intensive care unit using the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS). A BPS score of ≥6 (pain) versus <6 (no pain) was the dependent variable for determining the effect on pain.

RESULTS

　Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that in 99 observations made at rest, pre- and post-turning and pre- and post-tracheal suctioning, the BPS score was significantly affected by gender, the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale score, PaCO₂, and HCO₃^-. The associations between BPS scores and APACHE II scores and HCO₃^- demonstrated that pain results from biological responses to invasion. Increases in PaCO₂ affecting only the total BPS score suggests that PaCO₂ is associated with other pain responses, regardless of respiratory status.

CONCLUSION

　The BPS score was significantly associated with disease severity and ventilatory capacity, demonstrating a need to examine pain assessment methods tailored to the severity of underlying disease, degree of respiratory failure and other aspects of individual patient's condition for effective pain management.

[Validation of the Brazilian version of Behavioral Pain Scale in adult sedated and mechanically ventilated patients]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The Behavioral Pain Scale is a pain assessment tool for uncommunicative and sedated Intensive Care Unit patients. The lack of a Brazilian scale for pain assessment in adults mechanically ventilated justifies the relevance of this study that aimed to validate the Brazilian version of Behavioral Pain Scale as well as to correlate its scores with the records of physiological parameters, sedation level and severity of disease.

METHODS

Twenty-five Intensive Care Unit adult patients were included in this study. The Brazilian Behavioral Pain Scale version (previously translated and culturally adapted) and the recording of physiological parameters were performed by two investigators simultaneously during rest, during eye cleaning (non-painful stimulus) and during endotracheal suctioning (painful stimulus).

RESULTS

High values of responsiveness coefficient (coefficient=3.22) were observed. The Cronbach's alpha of total Behavioral Pain Scale score at eye cleaning and endotracheal suctioning was 0.8. The intraclass correlation coefficient of total Behavioral Pain Scale score was ≥ 0.8 at eye cleaning and endotracheal suctioning. There was a significant highest Behavioral Pain Scale score during application of painful procedure when compared with rest period (p≤0.0001). However, no correlations were observed between pain and hemodynamic parameters, sedation level, and severity of disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This pioneer validation study of Brazilian Behavioral Pain Scale exhibits satisfactory index of internal consistency, interrater reliability, responsiveness and validity. Therefore, the Brazilian Behavioral Pain Scale version was considered a valid instrument for being used in adult sedated and mechanically ventilated patients in Brazil.

A systematic review of observational pain assessment instruments for use with nonverbal intubated critically ill adult patients in the emergency department: an assessment of their suitability and psychometric properties

AIM AND OBJECTIVE

To examine the psychometric properties and suitability of the available observational pain instruments for potential use with nonverbal critically ill adult patients in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND

In the emergency department, assessing pain in critically ill patients is challenging, especially those unable to communicate the presence of pain. Critically ill patients are commonly unable to verbally communicate pain due to altered oral communication (e.g. endotracheal intubation) and/or diminished consciousness (e.g. sedation, delirium), placing them at great risk of inadequate pain management. Over half of intensive care critically ill intubated patients experience moderate-to-severe pain whilst intubated and mechanically ventilated.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

The CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, ProQuest databases, and the Cochrane Library and the National Institute of Clinical Excellence were also searched from their date of inception to April 2016, with no language restrictions applied.

REVIEW METHOD

Studies were identified using predetermined inclusion criteria. Data were extracted and summarised and underwent evaluation using published classification of psychometric tests for consistency of interpretation.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies evaluating five observational pain assessment instruments that had been used with critically ill intubated patients were identified. All five instruments included behavioural indicators, with two including physiologic indicators. All five instruments have undergone validity and reliability testing involving nonverbal critically ill intubated patients, three were examined for feasibility, and one instrument underwent sensitivity and specificity testing. None have been tested within the emergency department with nonverbal critically ill intubated adult patients.

CONCLUSION

The use of an appropriate and valid observational pain assessment instrument is fundamental to detecting and optimising pain management in nonverbal critically ill intubated patients in the emergency department. Of the observational pain assessment instruments reviewed, the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool was identified as most appropriate for testing in a prospective trial in an emergency department setting.

Risk factors and prognosis of pain events during mechanical ventilation: a retrospective study

Background

Pain assessment is highly recommended in patients receiving mechanical ventilation. However, pain intensity and its impact on outcomes in these patients remain obscure. We collected the results of routine pain assessments, utilizing the behavioral pain scale (BPS), from 151 patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Risk factors associated with a pain event, defined as BPS of >5, and its impact on patient outcomes were investigated.

Methods

A total of 151 consecutive adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation for more than 24 h in a single 10-bed ICU were enrolled in this study. The highest BPS within 48 h after the initiation of mechanical ventilation was collected, as well as information about the patients’ characteristics and medication received. We also recorded patient outcomes, including time to successful weaning from mechanical ventilation, time to successful ICU discharge, and 30-day in-hospital mortality. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine factors independently associated with patients with a BPS of >5. Clinical outcomes were also assessed using multivariate logistic regression analysis, correcting for risk factors.

Results

We analyzed 151 patients. The median highest BPS was 4. The percentage of patients who recorded a BPS of >5 was 19.9% (n = 30). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the disuse of fentanyl and inotropic support was an independent predictor of pain event. Multivariable Cox regression analysis suggested that the development of a BPS of >5 was associated with increased mortality and a not statistically significant trend towards prolonged mechanical ventilation.

Conclusions

A significant proportion of ventilated patients experienced a BPS of >5 soon after the initiation of mechanical ventilation. Disuse of fentanyl and use of inotropic agents increased the risk of developing a BPS of >5 during mechanical ventilation. An association between adequate analgesia and improved patient outcomes provides a rationale for the assessment of pain during mechanical ventilation, with subsequent intervention if necessary.

Pain events were common among ventilated patients. In critical care settings, appropriate and adequate pain management is warranted, given the association with improved patient outcomes.

The reliability of the German version of the Richards Campbell Sleep Questionnaire

BACKGROUND

The assessment of sleep quality in critically ill patients is a relevant factor of high-quality care. Despite the fact that sleep disturbances and insufficient sleep management contain an increased risk of severe morbidity for these patients, a translated and applicable instrument to evaluate sleep is not available for German-speaking intensive care settings.

AIM

This study aimed to translate the Richards Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ), a simple and validated instrument eligible for measuring sleep quality in critically ill patients, and subsequently to evaluate the internal consistency of the German version of the RCSQ. Furthermore, it also aimed to inquire into the perception of sleep in a sample of critically ill patients.

METHODS

The RCSQ was translated following established methodological standards. Data were collected cross-sectionally in a sample of 51 patients at 3 intensive care units at a university hospital in Germany.

RESULTS

The German version of the RCSQ showed an overall internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) of 0·88. The mean of the RSCQ in the sample was 47·00 (SD ± 27·57). Depth of sleep was rated the lowest and falling asleep again the highest of the RCSQ sleep items.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrated very good internal consistency of the German version of the RCSQ, allowing for its application in practice and research in German-speaking countries. Quality of sleep perception was generally low in this sample, emphasizing the need for enhanced care concepts regarding the sleep management of critically ill patients. Relevance to clinical practice Assessment of self-perception of sleep is crucial in order to plan an individually tailored care process.

Association between lymphocyte expression of the apoptotic receptor Fas and pain in critically ill patients

Objective

Lymphocyte apoptosis in critical illness is associated with immunosuppression. We explored for the first time the associations between pain ratings and expression of the apoptotic receptor Fas on B and T cells in critically ill patients and the potential mediating effects of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), cortisol, and substance P (SP).

Design

This is an exploratory correlational study with repeated measurements (14 days followup) and cross-sectional comparisons.

Setting

This study was conducted in a state hospital in the metropolitan area of Athens, Greece.

Participants

The participants were 36 consecutive critically ill patients and 36 matched controls.

Outcome measures

Pain measured by the self-reported numeric rating scale [NRS], the behavioral pain scale, and the pain assessment scale was the primary outcome measure. Flow cytometry (Fas), electrochemiluminescence (ACTH and cortisol) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (SP) were used. Mixed linear models for repeated measurements and bivariable associations at discrete time points were employed.

Results

Significant pain at rest was noted. Pain ratings associated with Fas expression on cytotoxic T cells (P=0.041) and B cells (P=0.005), even after adjustment for a number of clinical treatment factors (P=0.006 and P=0.052, respectively). On the day that more patients were able to communicate, Fas on B cells (r=0.897, P=0.029) and cytotoxic T cells (r=0.832; P=0.037) associated with NRS ratings. Associations between pain ratings and ACTH serum levels were noted (P<0.05). When stress neuropeptide levels were added to the model, the statistical significance of the associations between pain ratings and Fas expression was attenuated (P=0.052–0.063), suggesting that stress neuropeptides may partially mediate the association.

Conclusion

Preliminary evidence for the association between pain and lymphocyte apoptotic susceptibility is provided. The role of pain management in maintaining immunocompetence in critical illness is worth exploring.

A Study on the Psychometric Properties of Revised-nonverbal Pain Scale and Original-nonverbal Pain Scale in Iranian Nonverbal-ventilated Patients

Background and Aims:

The nonverbal pain scale is one of the instruments which study pain in nonverbal-ventilated patients with regard to the changes of behavioral and physiological indices. The purpose of the study is to survey the psychometric properties of revised-nonverbal pain scale (R-NVPS) and original-nonverbal pain scale (O-NVPS) in ventilated patients hospitalized in critical care units.

Materials and Methods:

Four nurses studied pain in sixty patients hospitalized in trauma, medical, neurology, and surgical critical care units using R-NVPS and O-NVPS at six times (before, during, and after nociceptive and nonnociceptive procedures). The test was repeated in 37 patients after 8–12 h.

Results:

Cronbach's alpha coefficient for R-NVPS and O-NVPS was 0.8 and 0.76, respectively. The inter-rater correlation coefficient during different times was r = 0.89–0.96 for R-NVPS and r = 0.80–0.87 for O-NVPS. Test-retest correlation coefficient for R-NVPS and O-NVPS was r = 0.55–0.86 and r = 0.51–0.75, respectively. The meaningful difference in pain score between nociceptive and nonnociceptive procedures (P < 0.001) and a higher pain score in patients who confirmed pain (P < 0.001) showed a discriminant and criterion validity for both scales of NVPS, respectively.

Conclusions:

R-NVPS and O-NVPS can both be used as valid and reliable scales in studying pain in ventilated patient. However, in comparing the items, “respiration” (R-NVPS) had a higher sensitivity than “physiology II” (O-NVPS) in assessing pain.

Sedation and Analgesia

Patients in the cardiothoracic intensive care unit (CTICU) are subject to numerous physical and mental stresses. While most of these cannot be completely eliminated, intensivists have many tools in their armamentarium to alleviate patients' pain and suffering. This chapter will consider the importance of analgesia and sedation in the CTICU and the relevant consequences of over- or under-treatment. We will examine the tools available for monitoring and titrating analgesia and sedation in critically ill patients. The major classes of medications available will be reviewed, with particular attention to their clinical effects, metabolism and excretion, and hemodynamic characteristics. Lastly, experimental evidence will be assessed regarding the best strategies for treatment of pain and agitation in the CTICU, including use of non-pharmacologic adjuvants.

Pain Measurement in Mechanically Ventilated Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury: Behavioral Pain Tools Versus Analgesia Nociception Index

Introduction:

Pain is highly prevalent in critically ill trauma patients, especially those with a traumatic brain injury (TBI). Behavioral pain tools such as the behavioral pain scale (BPS) and critical-care pain observation tool are recommended for sedated noncommunicative patients. Analysis of heart rate variability (HRV) is a noninvasive method to evaluate autonomic nervous system activity. The analgesia nociception index (ANI) device (Physiodoloris^®, MDoloris Medical Systems, Loos, France) allows noninvasive HRV analysis. The ANI assesses the relative parasympathetic tone as a surrogate for antinociception/nociception balance in sedated patients. The primary aim of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of ANI in detecting pain in TBI patients. The secondary aim was to evaluate the impact of norepinephrine use on ANI effectiveness and to determine the correlation between ANI and BPS.

Methods:

We performed a prospective observational study in 21 deeply sedated TBI patients. Exclusion criteria were nonsinus cardiac rhythm; presence of pacemaker; atropine or isoprenaline treatment; neuromuscular blocking agents; and major cognitive impairment. Heart rate, blood pressure, and ANI were continuously recorded using the Physiodoloris^® device at rest (T1), during (T2), and after the end (T3) of the painful stimulus (tracheal suctioning).

Results:

In total, 100 observations were scored. ANI was significantly lower at T2 (Median [min – max] 54.5 [22–100]) compared with T1 (90.5 [50–100], P < 0.0001) and T3 (82 [36–100], P < 0.0001). Similar results were found in the subgroups of patients with (65 measurements) or without (35) norepinephrine. During procedure, a negative linear relationship was observed between ANI and BPS (r² = −0.469, P < 0.001). At the threshold of 50, the sensitivity and specificity of ANI to detect patients with BPS ≥ 5 were 73% and 62%, respectively, with a negative predictive value of 86%.

Discussion:

Our results suggest that ANI is effective in detecting pain in ventilated sedated TBI patients, including those patients treated with norepinephrine.

Evaluation of the preliminary effectiveness of hand massage therapy on postoperative pain of adults in the intensive care unit after cardiac surgery: a pilot randomized controlled trial

Although many intensive care unit patients experience significant pain, very few studies explored massage to maximize their pain relief. This study aimed to evaluate the preliminary effects of hand massage on pain after cardiac surgery in the adult intensive care unit. A pilot randomized controlled trial was used for this study. The study was conducted in a Canadian medical-surgical intensive care unit. Forty adults who were admitted to the intensive care unit after undergoing elective cardiac surgery in the previous 24 hours participated in the study. They were randomly assigned to the experimental (n = 21) or control (n = 19) group. The experimental group received a 15-minute hand massage, and the control group received a 15-minute hand-holding without massage. In both groups the intervention was followed by a 30-minute rest period. The interventions were offered on 2-3 occasions within 24 hours after surgery. Pain, muscle tension, and vital signs were assessed. Pain intensity and behavioral scores were decreased for the experimental group. Although hand massage decreased muscle tension, fluctuations in vital signs were not significant. This study supports potential benefits of hand massage for intensive care unit postoperative pain management. Although larger randomized controlled trials are necessary, this low-cost nonpharmacologic intervention can be safely administered.

Research in Review: Advancing Critical Care Practice

Research published in 2016 identified strategies to enhance acute and critical care, initiated discussions on professional roles and responsibilities, clarified complex care issues, and led to robust debate. Some of this important work addressed strategies to prevent delirium and pressure ulcers, considerations for pain management within the context of the opioid abuse crisis, strategies to guide fluid resuscitation in patients with sepsis and heart failure, and ways to enhance care for family members of intensive care patients. The new sepsis definitions highlight the importance of detecting and providing care to patients with sepsis outside of critical care areas. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy is an example of the advancement of research in genomics and personalized medicine and of the need to understand the care implications of these therapies. Other research topics include interprofessional collaboration and shared decision-making as well as nurses' role in family conferences. Resources such as policies related to medical futility and inappropriate care and the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses' healthy work environment standards may inform conversations and provide strategies to address these complex issues.

A Turkish Version of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool: Reliability and Validity Assessment

PURPOSE

The study aim was to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool in critically ill patients.

DESIGN

A repeated measures design was used for the study.

METHODS

A convenience sample of 66 patients who had undergone open-heart surgery in the cardiovascular surgery intensive care unit in Ordu, Turkey, was recruited for the study. The patients were evaluated by using the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool at rest, during a nociceptive procedure (suctioning), and 20 minutes after the procedure while they were conscious and intubated after surgery.

FINDING

The Turkish version of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool has shown statistically acceptable levels of validity and reliability. Inter-rater reliability was supported by moderate-to-high-weighted κ coefficients (weighted κ coefficient = 0.55 to 1.00). For concurrent validity, significant associations were found between the scores on the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool and the Behavioral Pain Scale scores. Discriminant validity was also supported by higher scores during suctioning (a nociceptive procedure) versus non-nociceptive procedures. The internal consistency of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool was 0.72 during a nociceptive procedure and 0.71 during a non-nociceptive procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool was determined to be acceptable for pain assessment in critical care, especially for patients who cannot communicate verbally.

Accuracy of Critical Care Pain Observation Tool and Behavioral Pain Scale to assess pain in critically ill conscious and unconscious patients: prospective, observational study

Background

Critically ill patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) may suffer from different painful stimuli, but the assessment of pain is difficult because most of them are almost sedated and unable to self-report. Thus, it is important to optimize evaluation of pain in these patients. The main aim of this study was to compare two commonly used scales for pain evaluation: Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) and Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS), in both conscious and unconscious patients. Secondary aims were (1) to identifying the most relevant parameters to determine pain scales changes during nursing procedures, (2) to compare both pain scales with visual analog scale (VAS), and (3) to identify the best combination of scales for evaluation of pain in patients unable to communicate.

Methods

In this observational study, 101 patients were evaluated for a total of 303 consecutive observations during 3 days after ICU admission. Measurements with both scales were obtained 1 min before, during, and 20 min after nursing procedures in both conscious (n.41) and unconscious (n.60) patients; furthermore, VAS was recorded when possible in conscious patients only. We calculated criterion and discriminant validity to both scales (Wilcoxon, Spearman rank correlation coefficients). The accuracy of individual scales was evaluated. The sensitivity and the specificity of CPOT and BPS scores were assessed. Kappa coefficients with the quadratic weight were used to reflect agreement between the two scales, and we calculated the effect size to identify the strength of a phenomenon.

Results

CPOT and BPS showed a good criterion and discriminant validity (p < 0.0001). BPS was found to be more specific (91.7 %) than CPOT (70.8 %), but less sensitive (BPS 62.7 %, CPOT 76.5 %). COPT and BPS scores were significantly correlated with VAS (p < 0.0001). The combination of BPS and CPOT resulted in better sensitivity 80.4 %. Facial expression was the main parameter to determine pain scales changes effect size = 1.4.

Conclusions

In critically ill mechanically ventilated patients, both CPOT and BPS can be used for assessment of pain intensity with different sensitivity and specificity. The combination of both BPS and CPOT might result in improved accuracy to detect pain compared to scales alone.

Trial registration

NCT01669486

Best Practices for Managing Pain, Sedation, and Delirium in the Mechanically Ventilated Patient

Nursing management of pain, agitation, and delirium in mechanically ventilated patients is a challenge in critical care. Oversedation can lead to delayed extubation, prolonged ventilator days, unnecessary neurologic testing, and complications such as weakness and delirium. Undersedation can lead to self-extubation, invasive line removal, unnecessary patient distress, and injury to self or others. Acquiring an optimal level of sedation requires the bedside nurse to be more vigilant than ever with patient assessment and medication titration. This article provides a historical perspective of the management of pain, agitation, and delirium, and disseminates information contained in revised Society for Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines (January 2013) to promote their implementation in day-to-day nursing care.