Use of pain assessment tools: is there a preference?

Assessment and Management of Pain in Patients Sustaining Burns at Emergency Department Kenyatta National Hospital, Kenya: A Descriptive Study

Background: Poorly managed burn pain affects the victim by delayed healing, psychological disturbances, and chronic pain. Burn injuries are the fourth leading cause of injuries worldwide. The incidence of thermal burns in Kenya is 3%. Pain assessment and control are integral parts of management that a burn victim should be offered. We lack data on pain management in burn patients during setup. Methods: A descriptive study was carried out at the emergency department (ED) of Kenyatta National Hospital. We enrolled patients who sustained thermal burns until a sample 138 patients was reached. Enrollment of patients was done from February to August 2015. The pain level was assessed using a visual analogue scale, and the Lund and Browder chart was used to record the depth and extent of the burn. Data on the type of analgesia prescribed and its route of administration was collected. Data was analyzed using STATA v.11. Results: The median age of the sample was 28 years with a male to female ratio 1.8:1. The majority of the victims (38%) sustained flame burns. The median total body surface area was 19.5%. Pain assessment was done in 2% with a visual analogue scale and face pain recognition scale. Mean Visual Analogue score was 7. Analgesia was offered to 96% of participants, and it was unimodal in the majority, 76.7%, and the preferred drug of choice was morphine. The majority of all burn patients had sustained moderate to major burns. The tools used to assess pain in this hospital were Face Pain Recognition Scale and Visual Analogue Scale; however, pain assessment was done on a meagre 2% of the sample. Conclusions: A minority of the patients had any sort of pain assessment done at the emergency department. As a result, burn pain was inappropriately managed. There is a need to improve the assessment of burn pain and improve its management by encouraging training of ED burn care providers by burn surgeons and pain therapists.

American Burn Association Guidelines on the Management of Acute Pain in the Adult Burn Patient: A Review of the Literature, a Compilation of Expert Opinion, and Next Steps

The ABA pain guidelines were developed 14 years ago and have not been revised despite evolution in the practice of burn care. A sub-committee of the American Burn Association's Committee on the Organization and Delivery of Burn Care was created to revise the adult pain guidelines. A MEDLINE search of English-language publications from 1968 to 2018 was conducted using the keywords "burn pain," "treatment," and "assessment." Selected references were also used from the greater pain literature. Studies were graded by two members of the committee using Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine-Levels of Evidence. We then met as a group to determine expert consensus on a variety of topics related to treating pain in burn patients. Finally, we assessed gaps in the current knowledge and determined research questions that would aid in providing better recommendations for optimal pain management of the burn patient. The literature search produced 189 papers, 95 were found to be relevant to the assessment and treatment of burn pain. From the greater pain literature 151 references were included, totaling 246 papers being analyzed. Following this literature review, a meeting to establish expert consensus was held and 20 guidelines established in the areas of pain assessment, opioid medications, nonopioid medications, regional anesthesia, and nonpharmacologic treatments. There is increasing research on pain management modalities, but available studies are inadequate to create a true standard of care. We call for more burn specific research into modalities for burn pain control as well as research on multimodal pain control.

Superiority of occipital donor sites for split-thickness skin grafting in dermatosurgery: Results of a prospective randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Split-thickness skin grafts are commonly used in dermatosurgery. For occipital donor sites, retrospective studies have shown good results with respect to graft take and healing rates. Nevertheless, the majority of grafts in dermatosurgery are harvested from the thigh. To date, there has been no prospective randomized controlled study comparing occipital versus femoral donor sites.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Following micrographically controlled R0 tumor resection, 108 patients were randomized prior to undergoing split-thickness skin grafting (donor site: occiput vs. thigh). Follow-up examinations were carried out on day 3, 5, 7, and 14, as well as one month and three months after surgery. Documented data included graft take rates, re-epithelialization rates at the donor site, pain, cosmetic outcome, Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), and complications.

RESULTS

Occipital donor sites showed significantly faster reepithelization, less pain, fewer complications, a better cosmetic outcome, and better results on the VSS. With regard to graft take rates, grafts harvested from the occiput were significantly superior on days 3 and 5.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first randomized controlled trial showing a significant superiority of occipital compared to femoral donor sites regarding re-epithelialization, pain, cosmetic outcome and the Vancouver Scar Scale.

Non-drug Non-invasive Treatment in the Management of Low Back Pain

Background:

Low back pain (LBP) is a major medical problem. World-wide, from 60% to 80% of people will have it during their lifetime and 2-5% will have it at any given time. The disease impacts upon activities of daily living ultimately leading to a loss of functional independence and quality of life.

Aim:

The main purpose of this study was to assess the results of non-drug non-invasive treatment in the management of LBP.

Subjects and Methods:

This was prospective study conducted in the Department of Orthopedics in M. M. Medical College, Mullana, Ambala, Haryana, India from June 2005 to June 2010. A total of 251 out-patients of LBP with a mean age of 45 years were studied. They were managed with non-invasive treatment and were followed for 24 months.

Results:

Objective Lumbar Spine Assessments up to the age of 40 years at 2 years were excellent. At 40-60 years of age, it was good to excellent. Over the age of 60 years, it was good. The back pain functional scale were found very good up to the age of 40 years at 2-year follow-up, good to very good between 40 and 60 years and over the age of 60 years it was good.

Conclusions:

Non-drug non-invasive interventions can reduce pain and improve function in LBP.

The colour of pain: can patients use colour to describe osteoarthritis pain?

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to explore patients' views on the acceptability and feasibility of using colour to describe osteoarthritis (OA) pain, and whether colour could be used to communicate pain to healthcare professionals.

METHODS

Six group interviews were conducted with 17 patients with knee OA. Discussion topics included first impressions about using colour to describe pain, whether participants could associate their pain with colour, how colours related to changes to intensity and different pain qualities, and whether they could envisage using colour to describe pain to healthcare professionals.

RESULTS

The group interviews indicated that, although the idea of using colour was generally acceptable, it did not suit all participants as a way of describing their pain. The majority of participants chose red to describe high-intensity pain; the reasons given were because red symbolized inflammation, fire, anger and the stop signal in a traffic light system. Colours used to describe the absence of pain were chosen because of their association with positive emotional feelings, such as purity, calmness and happiness. A range of colours was chosen to represent changes in pain intensity. Aching pain was consistently identified as being associated with colours such as grey or black, whereas sharp pain was described using a wider selection of colours. The majority of participants thought that they would be able to use colour to describe their pain to healthcare professionals, although issues around the interpretability and standardization of colour were raised.

CONCLUSIONS

For some patients, using colour to describe their pain experience may be a useful tool to improve doctor-patient communication.

Analgo-sedation of patients with burns outside the operating room

Following the initial resuscitation of burn patients, the pain experienced may be divided into a 'background' pain and a 'breakthrough' pain associated with painful procedures. While background pain may be treated with intravenous opioids via continuous infusion or patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) and/or less potent oral opioids, breakthrough pain may be treated with a variety of interventions. The aim is to reduce patient anxiety, improve analgesia and ensure immobilization when required. Untreated pain and improper sedation may result in psychological distress such as post-traumatic stress disorder, major depression or delirium. This review summarizes recent developments and current techniques in sedation and analgesia in non-intubated adult burn patients during painful procedures performed outside the operating room (e.g. staple removal, wound-dressing, bathing). Current techniques of sedation and analgesia include different approaches, from a slight increase in background pain therapy (e.g. morphine PCA) to PCA with rapid-onset opioids, to multimodal drug combinations, nitrous oxide, regional blocks, or non-pharmacological approaches such as hypnosis and virtual reality. The most reliable way to administer drugs is intravenously. Fast-acting opioids can be combined with ketamine, propofol or benzodiazepines. Adjuvant drugs such as clonidine or NSAIDs and paracetamol (acetaminophen) have also been used. Patients receiving ketamine will usually maintain spontaneous breathing. This is an important feature in patients who are continuously turned during wound dressing procedures and where analgo-sedation is often performed by practitioners who are not specialists in anaesthesiology. Drugs are given in small boluses or by patient-controlled sedation, which is titrated to effect, according to sedation and pain scales. Patient-controlled infusion with propofol has also been used. However, we must bear in mind that burn patients often show an altered pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic response to drugs as a result of altered haemodynamics, protein binding and/or increased extracellular fluid volume, and possible changes in glomerular filtration. Because sedation and analgesia can range from minimal sedation (anxiolysis) to general anaesthesia, sedative and analgesic agents should always be administered by designated trained practitioners and not by the person performing the procedure. At least one individual who is capable of establishing a patent airway and positive pressure ventilation, as well as someone who can call for additional assistance, should always be present whenever analgo-sedation is administered. Oxygen should be routinely delivered during sedation. Blood pressure and continuous ECG monitoring should be carried out whenever possible, even if a patient is undergoing bathing or other procedures that may limit monitoring of vital pulse-oximetry parameters.

Making pain assessment more accessible to children and parents: can greater involvement improve the quality of care?

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether nursing and parental pain assessment documentation and analgesia administration increased with the use of a temporary tattoo of a pain intensity scale (TTPS) compared with a paper version of the pain scale (PPS). To document any adverse skin reactions from the use of the TTPS and to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the PPS and TTPS for use as postoperative pain assessment tools in the home and clinical setting.

METHODS

Two pilot randomized controlled trials were conducted to test the TTPS intervention and the PPS control condition in children aged 6 to 12 years, after surgery. Trial 1 involved children admitted to hospital for planned inpatient surgery (n=86). Trial 2 involved children discharged home following day case surgery (n=25).

RESULTS

The TTPS was well accepted and there were no adverse effects. Our hypothesis that the TTPS would increase documentation of pain assessment or analgesic administration was not supported. However, a number of confounding factors may explain the findings. Children in both trials indicated greater overall satisfaction with the TTPS and responses from both parents and children suggested some aspects of the quality of the pain management experience were enhanced with use of the TTPS in both trials.

DISCUSSION

The TTPS is a new method to engage children in pain assessment, which may have positive effects on the quality of postoperative pain assessment and management in hospital and home settings. Larger trials are needed to determine the effectiveness of the TTPS across all pediatric settings and for children with nonsurgical and also surgical pain. The findings from these pilot trials provide useful information for design and power estimation for further research in inpatient and home settings.

Burn injury pain: the continuing challenge

The development of more effective methods of relieving pain associated with burn injury is a major unmet medical need. Not only is acute burn injury pain a source of immense suffering, but it has been linked to debilitating chronic pain and stress-related disorders. Although pain management guidelines and protocols have been developed and implemented, unrelieved moderate-to-severe pain continues to be reported after burn injury. One reason for this is that the intensity of pain associated with wound care and rehabilitation therapy, the major source of severe pain in this patient population, varies widely over the 3 phases of burn recovery, making it difficult to estimate analgesic requirements. The effects of opioids, the most commonly administered analgesics for burn injury procedural pain, are difficult to gauge over the course of burn recovery because the need for an opioid may change rapidly, resulting in the overmedication or undermedication of burn-injured patients. Understanding the mechanisms that contribute to the intensity and variability of burn injury pain over time is crucial to its proper management. We provide an overview of the types of pain associated with a burn injury, describe how these different types of pain interfere with the phases of burn recovery, and summarize pharmacologic pain management strategies across the continuum of burn care. We conclude with a discussion and suggestions for improvement. Rational management, based on the underlying mechanisms that contribute to the intensity and variability of burn injury pain, is in its infancy. The paucity of information highlights the need for research that explores and advances the identification of mechanisms of acute and chronic burn injury pain.

PERSPECTIVE

Researchers continue to report that burn pain is undertreated. This review examines burn injury pain management across the phases of burn recovery, emphasizing 3 types of pain that require separate assessment and management. It provides insights and suggestions for future research directions to address this significant clinical problem.

The verbal numeric pain scale: effects of patient education on self-reports of pain

BACKGROUND

Emergency department (ED) patients are frequently asked to provide a self-report of the level of pain experienced using a verbal numeric rating scale.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of patient education regarding the verbal numeric rating scale on self-reports of pain among ED patients.

METHODS

In this prospective, interventional study, 310 eligible ED patients with pain, aged 18 years and older, were randomized to view either a novel educational video (n = 155) or a novel print brochure (n = 155) as an educational intervention, both developed to deliver educational information about the verbal numeric pain scale and its use. Participants initially rated their pain on a scale from 0 to 10 and then were administered the educational intervention. Following the educational intervention, participants completed a survey that included demographic information, postinterventional pain score, prior pain experience, and subjective rating of the helpfulness of the educational intervention. Fifty-five consecutive participants were enrolled as controls and received no educational intervention but gave a self-reported triage pain score and a second pain score at an equivalent time interval. Clinical significance was defined as a decrease in pain of 2 or more points following the education.

RESULTS

Following the educational interventions, there were statistically significant, although not clinically significant, decreases in mean pain scores within each intervention group (video: mean change, 1 point [95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.7 to 1.2]; printed brochure: mean change, 0.6 points [95% CI = 0.4 to 0.8]). For participants in the control group (no intervention), there was no significant change (mean change, 0.2 points [95% CI = -0.2 to 0.5]). A clinically significant decrease in pain was seen in 28% of the video group, 23% of the brochure group, and 5% of controls. Most patients had no change (71% of the video group, 73% of the brochure group, and 89% of controls). Participants rated the helpfulness of the video educational intervention as 7.1 (95% CI = 6.7 to 7.5) and the print educational intervention as 6.7 (95% CI = 6.2 to 7.1) on a scale from 0 (least effective) to 10 (most helpful).

CONCLUSIONS

Among ED participants with pain, both educational interventions (video and printed brochure) resulted in statistically and clinically significant decreased self-reported pain scores by 2 or more points in 26% of participants compared with 5% of controls. The educational interventions were rated as helpful by participants, with no appreciable difference between the two intervention groups.

Unique considerations in caring for a pediatric burn patient: a developmental approach

Treatment of the child with a burn injury is a dynamic and complex process incorporating pediatric physiology, cognition, and emotional development. An understanding of child development and the importance of the family plays a key role in the child's recovery at all ages. An account of a teenager's burn injury is depicted through the voices of the teenager and his nurse. This article explores that experience and provides a comprehensive look at the role of the burn team, family, and community in his recovery.

Assessing Pain Control in Nonverbal Critically Ill Adults

The accurate assessment of pain in nonverbal patients is difficult, with nurses often relying on a variety of methods to determine medication impact. Much of the evidence to date suggests that commonly used indicators of pain may not effectively measure the true extent of distress in patients unable to verbalize their level of discomfort. A recent pilot study of an existing and newly developed pain assessment scale reinforces this concern.

Characteristics associated with analgesia ordering in the intensive care unit and relationships with outcome

OBJECTIVE

To describe clinical characteristics associated with analgesia utilization in the intensive care unit.

DESIGN

A prospective cohort study of adult patients admitted to a medical intensive care unit.

SUBJECTS

Four hundred adult patients.

SETTING

Twelve-bed medical intensive care unit of an inner-city, university-affiliated hospital.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Collected data included demographics, sedation and neuromuscular blocking agents used, mechanical ventilation, hemodynamic monitoring, Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System score, Logistic Organ Dysfunction System (LODS) score, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score. Hospital outcome was noted. The odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals were determined by using multiple logistic regression analyses. Patients' mean age (+/-sd) was 47.8 +/- 17.1 yrs; 58% were male, 84% African-American. Their APACHE II-predicted hospital mortality rate was 33%. Analgesics were used in 36% of patients. There were no differences in demographics, initial LODS score, APACHE II score, and mechanical ventilation use between patients who did and did not receive analgesics. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that analgesic use was independently associated with sedation (odds ratio, 2.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.47-4.14), neuromuscular blockade (odds ratio, 4.98; 95% confidence interval, 1.85-13.41), and pulmonary artery flotation catheter utilization (odds ratio, 2.31; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-4.20). The median duration of mechanical ventilation was 5 days for those who received analgesia compared with 2 for those who did not (p =.0001). The median length of stay in the intensive care unit (4 vs. 2, p <.0001) and hospital (11 vs. 7, p <.0001) was higher in patients who received analgesics. There were no significant differences in intensive care unit and hospital mortality rates between patients who did and did not receive analgesics.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensive care unit patients for whom analgesics were prescribed have a higher frequency of hemodynamic monitoring and use of sedative and neuromuscular blocking agents, more mechanical ventilation days, and longer intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay.

Pain outcome measures

Pain is a complex, multi-dimensional experience that is usually associated with local tissue damage or may be referred from a distant site. Classically, pain is viewed as having sensory, affective, and cognitive components. To assess pain, however, the clinician or the researcher must use the most appropriate measure for the given situation. Many pain outcome measures are currently in use. Some of these are simple uni-dimensional scales, whereas others adopt a more multi-dimensional approach. Pain is rarely measured in isolation but must instead be put into the context of the whole person and that person's functional ability. All these factors should be borne in mind in the evaluation of pain in the hand. This paper discusses pain measurement instruments and makes recommendations for assessment of pain in the hand.