Psychometric comparison of three behavioural scales for the assessment of pain in critically ill patients unable to self-report

Effect of level of sedation on outcomes in critically ill adult patients: a systematic review of clinical trials with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Background

Sedation is routinely administered to critically ill patients to alleviate anxiety, discomfort, and patient-ventilator asynchrony. However, it must be balanced against risks such as delirium and prolonged intensive care stays. This study aimed to investigate the effects of different levels of sedation in critically ill adults.

Methods

Systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) of randomised clinical trials including critically ill adults admitted to the intensive care unit. CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and Web of Science were searched from their inception to 13 June 2023. Risks of bias were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Aggregate data were synthesised with meta-analyses and TSA, and the certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. This study is registered with PROSPERO: CRD42023386960.

Findings

Fifteen trials randomising 4352 patients were included, of which 13 were assessed high risk of bias. Meta-analyses comparing lighter to deeper sedation showed no evidence of a difference in all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83-1.06; p = 0.28; 15 trials; moderate certainty evidence), serious adverse events (RR 0.99, CI 0.92-1.06; p = 0.80; 15 trials; moderate certainty evidence), or delirium (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.94-1.09; p = 0.78; 11 trials; moderate certainty evidence). TSA showed that when assessing mortality, a relative risk reduction of 16% or more between the compared interventions could be rejected.

Interpretation

The level of sedation has not been shown to affect the risks of death, delirium, and other serious adverse events in critically ill adult patients. While TSA suggests that additional trials are unlikely to significantly change the conclusion of the meta-analyses, the certainty of evidence was moderate. This suggests a need for future high-quality studies with higher methodological rigor.

Funding

None.

Development of an Acute Pain Assessment Tool for Patients in Post-anesthesia Care Units

BACKGROUND

Post-operative pain is a common form of acute pain. Objective pain assessment in post-anesthesia care units after surgery is useful regardless of the patient's condition.

AIMS

This study aimed to develop and evaluate an acute pain assessment tool for patients in post-anesthesia care units.

DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional observational study comprising two stages: scale development and psychometric evaluation.

SETTINGS

 .

PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS

 .

METHODS

Scale items were developed based on a literature review and content validity by experts. The validity and interrater reliability of the pain scale were evaluated using data from 218 patients admitted to the post-anesthesia care unit at a university hospital. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to identify the sensitivity and specificity for determining the cutoff point for acute pain.

RESULTS

We developed an objective acute pain scale, called the APA5, which ranges from 0-10 and comprises behavioral (facial and verbal expressions and body movement) and physiological (changes in heart rate and blood pressure) responses. The APA5 is valid and reliable for assessing acute pain in the recovery room. Sensitivity and specificity were acceptable when the cutoff was 2 out of 10 points.

CONCLUSIONS

The APA5 is an easy and simple tool for measuring pain in patients in post-anesthesia care units who have difficulties with self-reporting.

Orthopaedic Hand Patient Support Systems Have Valuable Insight to Patient Function and Pain

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROs) are increasingly used in clinical assessment. Research on how patient support systems contribute to physician understanding of patient condition is limited. Thus, insights from significant others may provide value, especially when concerns exist regarding patient response validity. Patients recruited from the pre-operative environment undergoing orthopaedic hand procedures responded to PROMIS-Pain Interference (PI), PROMIS-Upper Extremity (UE), PROMIS-Depression (D), and QuickDASH. They then selected a significant other (SO) to do the same. Patients and SOs were also asked to complete the West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory (WHYMPI) as a measure of support-related responses. Patient and SO responses were compared, and support-related responses were added in subsequent analyses to examine their effect on SO PRO assessment.

Pain assessment tools in adults with communication disorders: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Verbal communication is the "gold standard" for assessing pain. Consequently, individuals with communication disorders are particularly vulnerable to incomplete pain management. This review aims at identifying the current pain assessment instruments for adult patients with communication disorders.

METHODS

A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted on PubMed, PEDRO, EBSCOhost, VHL and Cochrane databases from 2011 to 2023 using MeSH terms "pain assessment, "nonverbal communication" and "communication disorders" in conjunction with additional inclusion criteria: studies limited to humans, interventions involving adult patients, and empirical investigations.

RESULTS

Fifty articles were included in the review. Seven studies report sufficient data to perform the meta-analysis. Observational scales are the most common instruments to evaluate pain in individuals with communication disorders followed by physiological measures and facial recognition systems. While most pain assessments rely on observational scales, current evidence does not strongly endorse one scale over others for clinical practice. However, specific observational scales appear to be particularly suitable for identifying pain during certain potentially painful procedures, such as suctioning and mobilization, in these populations. Additionally, specific observational scales appear to be well-suited for certain conditions, such as mechanically ventilated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

While observational scales dominate pain assessment, no universal tool exists for adults with communication disorders. Specific scales exhibit promise for distinct populations, yet the diverse landscape of tools hampers a one-size-fits-all solution. Crucially, further high-quality research, offering quantitative data like reliability findings, is needed to identify optimal tools for various contexts. Clinicians should be informed to select tools judiciously, recognizing the nuanced appropriateness of each in diverse clinical situations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This systematic review is registered in PROSPERO (International prospective register of systematic reviews) with the ID: CRD42022323655 .

Pain management education needs for nurses caring for older adults undergoing total knee replacement

INTRODUCTION

Effective postoperative pain management is necessary to improve the outcomes of older adults undergoing total knee replacement (TKR). Discovering what registered nurses (RNs) need to know about pain management may be beneficial to improving the quality of care.

AIM

The study aimed to identify the information needed to develop pain management education for RNs caring for older adults undergoing TKR.

METHODS

A qualitative descriptive design was used in this study. Three focus groups were conducted with 22 staff RNs with experience caring for older adults undergoing TKR at a supra-tertiary care hospital in Bangkok, Thailand; one focus group was conducted with five members of the hospital's nursing pain management committee. Data were analyzed using content analysis.

RESULTS

Two themes relevant to pain assessment education were pain assessment and pain management. Subthemes of pain assessment included challenges in cognitively impaired older adults, inadequate knowledge and misconceptions, and re-assessing pain. Three subthemes of pain management were created, including knowledge of pain medication, new trends in pharmacological pain management and devices, and non-pharmacological pain management using cold compression.

CONCLUSIONS

RNs require current information about pain management to provide effective postoperative care for older adults undergoing TKR. The findings may be used in pain management education to update RNs' knowledge of pain management.

Body-weight support gait training in neurological intensive care: safety, feasibility, and delays before walking with or without suspension

BACKGROUND

Early Mobilization in Intensive Care Units (ICUs) enhances patients' evolution, but has been rarely studied in neurological ICUs. The aim of this study was to assess gait training with body-weight support (BWS) in neuroICU, and to report on its safety, feasibility and on delays before walking with and without BWS.

METHODS

This study was an observational one-year single-center study. Inclusion criteria were adults with a neurological injury requiring mechanical ventilation. Exclusion criteria were early death or ICU transfer. After weaning from ventilation, patients were screened for indications of BWS walking using predefined criteria.

RESULTS

Patients' conditions were mostly brain injuries: 32% subarachnoid hemorrhages, 42% focal strokes, and 12% traumatic brain injuries. Out of 272 admissions, 136 patients were excluded, 78 were eligible, and 33 performed BWS walking. Among non-eligible patients, 36 walked unsuspended upon ventilation weaning, 17 presented too severe impairments. Among the 45 eligible patients who did not receive BWS training, main reasons were workload and weekends (31%), medical barriers (29%), and early ICU discharge (22%). 78 BWS sessions were performed on the 33 beneficiaries (median sessions per patient 2, max 10). Pre-session, most patients had inadequate response to pain, orders, or simple orientation questions. Sitting without support was impossible for 74%. Most pre-post changes in hemodynamic, respiratory, and pain parameters were small, and recovered spontaneously after the session. Eight sessions were interrupted; reasons were pain, fatigue or major imbalance (4), syncope (1), occurrence of stool (2), and battery failure (1). None of these adverse events required medical intervention, patients recovered upon session interruption. Median session duration was 31 min, patients walked on median 17 m. First BWS session occurred on median 3 days after ventilation weaning, and 11 days before patients were able to walk unsuspended.

CONCLUSIONS

Verticalization and walking using a suspension device in patients in neuroICU allows early gait training, despite challenging neurological impairments. It is safe and generally well tolerated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials database (ID: NCT04300491).

Prediction model of postoperative pain exacerbation using an intravenous patient-controlled analgesia device and a wearable electrocardiogram sensor

There is a need to develop objective and real-time postoperative pain assessment methods in perioperative medicine. Few studies have evaluated the relationship between pain severity and temporal changes of physiological signals in actual postoperative patients. In this study, we developed a machine learning model which was trained from intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) records and electrocardiogram (ECG) of postoperative patients to predict pain exacerbation. A self-attentive autoencoder (SA-AE) model achieved 54% of sensitivity and a 1.76 times/h of false positive rate.Clinical relevance- We proposed a novel method for evaluating postoperative pain in real time and demonstrated the possibility of predicting pain exacerbation. The proposed method would realize the automatic administration of analgesics and the optimization of opioid doses.

Evaluation of Pain Scales and Outcome in Critically Ill Patients of a Greek ICU

The purpose of the study was to evaluate painful procedures in ICU patients and to investigate their effect as well as the role of analgesia in the outcome. We measured pain level and vital signs before, during and after potentially painful procedures by using the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) and the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT). We analyzed the correlation of these measurements and of analgesia with the outcome. Twenty-eight patients were subjected to 160 stimuli. There were statistically significant differences in pain scores and most vital signs between the different timepoints (before-during, during-after). Most of them were significantly correlated with each other. Physiotherapy proved to be the most painful procedure. Regarding the outcome, the administration of extra analgesia predicted less days of mechanical ventilation (p = 0.015) and of ICU stay (p = 0.016). The higher change in BPS was correlated with more days of mechanical ventilation [B (95% CI) = 3.640 (1.001-6.280), p = 0.007] and of ICU stay [B (95% CI) = 3.645 (1.035-6.254), p = 0.006]. The higher change in CPOT and the nonuse of extra analgesia were related to increased mortality [OR (95% CI) = 1.492 (1.107-2.011), p = 0.009 and OR (95% CI) = 2.626 (1.013-6.806), p = 0.047]. Increased pain in ICU patients was successfully assessed by the BPS and CPOT and correlated to worse outcomes, which the administration of extra analgesia might improve.

Changes of the nociceptive flexion reflex threshold in patients undergoing cardiac surgery-a prospective clinical pilot study

Opioid dosage for general anaesthesia and sedation relies on surrogate parameters such as heartrate and blood pressure. This implies the risk of both under- and overdosing. A promising tool to provide target-oriented opioid dosing is measuring the nociceptive flexion reflex threshold (NFRT). The aim of this study was to investigate the individual trajectories and to determine this methods' clinical practicability in the perioperative setting of cardiac surgery. NFRT was measured preoperatively (twice as baseline), immediately after surgery and later in the general ward (primary outcomes). No intraoperative measurements were performed since neuromuscular blockade hinders NFRT assessment. Administered analgesics and pain scores were also recorded (secondary outcomes). Data were collected from August 2019 to March 2020. 264 patients scheduled for cardiac surgery were screened for eligibility. 55 patients were included, 30 rendered datasets for analysis. Thresholds after conclusion of surgery [T_ICU: median (IQR), 31.1 mA (21.5-50.0 mA)] were significantly higher than preoperatively [T_pre: 9.2 mA (5.4-13.4 mA); P < 0.001]. In 11 patients (36.7%), no immediate postoperative reflex response was elicited. Later, all reflexes returned, but thresholds remained significantly higher than preoperatively [T_post: 11.9 mA (9.2-16.6 mA); P = 0.043]. NFRT values after surgery were higher compared to baseline measurements. Subsequently they decreased but did not reach their baseline levels. There was no corresponding dose-dependency, suggesting multimodal effects on the nociceptive system. Unless measurements are not prevented by technical issues NFRT-assessment appears to be a future tool to target analgesics in patients not able to self-report pain. Trial registration Study registration: DRKS00021617. https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00021617 (registered retrospectively).

Pain Assessment with the BPS and CCPOT Behavioral Pain Scales in Mechanically Ventilated Patients Requiring Analgesia and Sedation

BACKGROUND

Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients often experience pain, especially during diagnostic, nursing, and therapeutic interventions. Pain assessment using the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) and Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CCPOT) are recommended, but they are difficult to do in patients undergoing deep sedation. This study analyzed the usefulness of the BPS and CCPOT scales in assessing pain among patients with varying degrees of sedation.

METHODS

In 81 mechanically ventilated and sedated ICU patients, 1005 measurements were performed using the BPS and CCPOT scales. The study was conducted by 3 trained observers 3 times a day (each measurement at rest, during painful nursing interventions, and after the intervention). The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS), the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II), and the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) were also analyzed from medical records as well as information on the length of hospitalization and treatment.

RESULTS

It was shown that signs of pain increased significantly (p < 0.001) during interventions in patients on both scales (BPS and CCPOT), and then returned to values close to the resting period. RASS results correlated significantly (p < 0.05) and positively with the results of the BPS and CCPOT. A strong correlation was found between the results of both scales at each stage of the study (R = 0.622-0.907).

CONCLUSIONS

Nursing procedures are a source of pain in analgosedated patients. The BPS and CCPOT scales are useful tools for assessing the occurrence of pain in mechanically ventilated patients, including those in deep sedation.

Discriminant properties of the Behavioral Pain Scale for assessment of procedural pain-related distress in ventilated children

OBJECTIVES

Children hospitalized in a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) are frequently exposed to distressing and painful medical procedures and interventions. There is a lack of clinical scales to measure procedural pain-related distress in ventilated children. The Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) was initially developed to detect procedural pain in critically ill adults. This study aims to assess the BPS's discriminant properties for measuring procedural pain-related distress in ventilated pediatric patients incorporating two instruments validated for pediatric patients.

METHODS

This prospective exploratory study was performed with ventilated children admitted to the interdisciplinary 14-bed PICU of the University Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany. The nurse in charge and an independent observer simultaneously assessed the patients using German versions of the BPS, the COMFORT-B scale (CBS), and the modified Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability (mFLACC) scale immediately before and during endotracheal suctioning.

RESULTS

We analyzed 170 parallel assessments in n=34 ventilated children. Patients were (mean ± SD) 9.5 ± 4.8 years old. Internal consistency for the BPS was excellent (α=0.93). We found a high rater agreement for all clinical scales (BPS: k=0.73, CBS: k=0.80, mFLACC: k=0.71). Strong correlations were identified between BPS and CBS (r=0.89) and BPS and mFLACC (r=0.79). The BPS cutoff values showed likewise excellent results (area under the curve CBS >16: 0.97; mFLACC >2: 0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

In our population of ventilated children, the BPS was well suited to detect procedural pain-related distress compared with two validated pain scales. Further extensive validation studies should follow to support our findings.

Pain Assessment in Intensive Care Unit: A Forgotten Entity or a Quality Indicator?

How to cite this article: Havaldar AA. Pain Assessment in Intensive Care Unit: A Forgotten Entity or a Quality Indicator? Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(4):419–420.

Analgesia in the Neurosurgical Intensive Care Unit

Acute pain in neurosurgical patients is an important issue. Opioids are the most used for pain treatment in the neurosurgical ICU. Potential side effects of opioid use such as oversedation, respiratory depression, hypercapnia, worsening intracranial pressure, nausea, and vomiting may be problems and could interfere with neurologic assessment. Consequently, reducing opioids and use of non-opioid analgesics and adjuvants (N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonists, α2 -adrenergic agonists, anticonvulsants, corticosteroids), as well as non-pharmacological therapies were introduced as a part of a multimodal regimen. Local and regional anesthesia is effective in opioid reduction during the early postoperative period. Among non-opioid agents, acetaminophen and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are used frequently. Adverse events associated with opioid use in neurosurgical patients are discussed. Larger controlled studies are needed to find optimal pain management tailored to neurologically impaired neurosurgical patients.

Functional assessment of long bone fracture healing in Samburu County Referral Hospital (Kenya): the squat and smile challenge

Background:

The burden of musculoskeletal trauma is increasing in low- and middle-income countries. Due to the low clinical follow-up rates in these regions, the Squat-and-Smile test (S&S) has previously been proposed as a proxy to assess bone healing (BH) capacity after surgery involving bone fractures. This study deals with various aspects of using S&S and bone radiography examination to obtain information about an individual's ability to recover after a trauma. In summary, we performed the S&S test to assess the possibility of recovering biomechanical function in lower limbs in a remote area of Kenya (Samburu County).

Methods:

Eighty-nine patients (17.9% F; 31.7 ± 18.9 yrs) who underwent intramedullary nail treatment for femur or tibia fractures were enrolled in this study. Both S&S [evaluated by a goal attainment scale (GAS)] and x-ray (evaluated by REBORNE, Bone Healing Score) were performed at 6 and 24 weeks, postoperatively. An acceptable margin for satisfactory S&S GAS scores was determined by assessing its validity, reliability, and sensitivity.

Results:

S&S GAS scores increased over time: 80.2% of patients performed a satisfactory S&S at the 24-weeks follow-up with a complete BH. A high correlation between S&S GAS and REBORNE at the 6- and 24- weeks’ timepoint was found. Facial expression correlated partially with BH. The S&S proved to be accurate at correctly depicting the BH process (75% area fell under the Receiver Operator Curve).

Conclusion:

The S&S provides a possible substitution for bone x-ray during BH assessment. The potential to remotely follow up the BH is certainly appealing in low- and middle-income countries, but also in high-income countries; as was recently observed with the Covid-19 pandemic when access to a hospital is not conceivable.

Nurses Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices Toward Pain Assessment and Management of Patients Unable to Communicate Verbally

Critically ill patients usually experience a significant level of pain during rest or during routine care such as turning, wound care, and endotracheal suctioning. Pain assessment is the cornerstone of pain management. Adequate pain assessment and management are major responsibilities of critical care nurses. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the nurses' knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward pain assessment and management of the intensive care unit (ICU) patients who are unable to communicate verbally. A descriptive cross-sectional design was used in this study. The study was conducted at ICUs in 5 hospitals from the north, middle, and south areas of Jordan. A self-administered questionnaire developed by Rose was used in this study. The most important finding in this study was that a large number of ICU nurses do not use assessment tools to evaluate the level of pain in patients who are unable to communicate verbally. Moreover, the nurses have inadequate knowledge about pain assessment and management. As perceived by the nurses, "restlessness" was the highest rated routine indicator of pain (25.1%), followed by "not following commands" (24%). Half of the participants (50%) answered that nurses were the persons who provide the most accurate rating of pain intensity. However, the participants showed positive attitude toward pain assessment and management.

Pain assessment of the adult sedated and ventilated patients in the intensive care setting: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Pain is frequently encountered in the intensive care setting. Given the impact of pain assessment on patient outcomes and length of hospital stay, studies have been conducted to validate tools, establish guidelines and cast light on practices relating to pain assessment.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the extent, range and nature of the evidence around pain assessment practices in adult patients who cannot self-report pain in the intensive care setting and summarise the findings from a heterogenous body of evidence to aid in the planning and the conduct of future research and management of patient care. The specific patient cohort studied was the sedated/ ventilated patient within the intensive care setting.

DESIGN

A scoping review protocol utilised the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping review checklist (PRISMA-ScR).

METHODS

The review comprised of five phases: identifying the research question, identifying relevant studies, study selection, charting the data and collating, summarizing, and reporting the results. Databases were systematically searched from January to April 2020. Databases included were Scopus, Web of Science, Medline via Ovid, CINAHL COMPLETE via EBSCO host, Health Source and PUBMED. Limits were applied on dates (2000 to current), language (English), subject (human) and age (adult). Key words used were "pain", "assessment", "measurement", "tools", "instruments", "practices", "sedated", "ventilated", "adult". A hand search technique was used to search citations within articles. Database alerts were set to apprise the availability of research articles pertaining to pain assessment practices in the intensive care setting.

RESULTS

The review uncovered literature categorised under five general themes: behaviour pain assessment tools, pain assessment guidelines, position statements and quality improvement projects, enablers and barriers to pain assessment, and evidence appertaining to actual practices. Behaviour pain assessment tools are the benchmark for pain assessment of sedated and ventilated patients. The reliability and validity of physiologic parameters to assess pain is yet to be determined. Issues of compliance with pain assessment guidelines and tools exist and impact on practices. In some countries like Australia, there is a dearth of information regarding the prevalence and characteristics of patients receiving analgesia, type of analgesia used, pain assessment practices and the process of recording pain management. In general, pain assessment varies across different intensive care settings and lacks consistency.

CONCLUSION

Research on pain assessment practices requires further investigation to explore the causative mechanisms that contribute to poor compliance with established pain management guidelines. The protocol of this review was registered with Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/25a6) Tweetable abstract: Pain assessment in intensive care settings lacks consistency. New information is needed to understand the causative mechanisms underpinning poor compliance with guidelines.

Evaluation of Nociception Using Quantitative Pupillometry and Skin Conductance in Critically Ill Unconscious Patients: A Pilot Study

Background: Pain assessment is a challenge in critically ill patients, in particular those who are unable to express movements in reaction to noxious stimuli. The purpose of the study was to compare the pupillary response and skin conductance to pain stimulation in critically ill unconscious patients. Methods: This observational study included adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with acute brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale < 9 with a motor response < 5) and/or requirements for deep level of sedation. Automated pupillometry (Algiscan, ID-MED, Marseille, France) was used to determine pupillary reflex dilation during tetanic stimulation. The maximum intensity of the stimulation value allowed the determination of a pupillary pain index score ranging from 1 (no nociception) to 9 (high nociception): a pupillary pain index (PPI) score of ≤4 was used to reflect adequate pain control. For skin conductance (SC), the number of SC peaks per second (NSCF) was collected concomitantly to tetanic stimulation. An NSCF of ≤0.07 peak/second was used to reflect adequate pain control. Results: Of the 51 included patients, there were 32 with brain injury and 19 receiving deep sedation. Mean PPI score was 5 (Interquartile Range= 2–7); a total of 28 (55%) patients showed inadequate control of the nociceptive stimulation according to the PPI assessment. Only 15 (29%) patients showed a detectable skin conductance, with NSCF values from 0.07 to 0.47/s. No correlation was found between skin conductance algesimeter (SCA)-derived variables and PPI score or pupillary dilation to pain. Conclusions: Detection of inadequate pain control might vary according to the method used to assess nociception in ICU patients. A poor agreement between quantitative pupillometry and skin conductance was observed.

Tools Are Needed to Promote Sedation Practices for Mechanically Ventilated Patients

Suboptimal sedation practices continue to be frequent, although the updated guidelines for management of pain, agitation, and delirium in mechanically ventilated (MV) patients have been published for several years. Causes of low adherence to the recommended minimal sedation protocol are multifactorial. However, the barriers to translation of these protocols into standard care for MV patients have yet to be analyzed. In our view, it is necessary to develop fresh insights into the interaction between the patients' responses to nociceptive stimuli and individualized regulation of patients' tolerance when using analgesics and sedatives. By better understanding this interaction, development of novel tools to assess patient pain tolerance and to define and predict oversedation or delirium may promote better sedation practices in the future.

Nursing Interventions to Prevent Delirium in Critically Ill Patients in the Intensive Care Unit during the COVID19 Pandemic-Narrative Overview

It has become a standard measure in recent years to utilise evidence-based practice, which is associated with a greater need to implement and use advanced, reliable methods of summarising the achievements of various scientific disciplines, including such highly specialised approaches as personalised medicine. The aim of this paper was to discuss the current state of knowledge related to improvements in "nursing" involving management of delirium in intensive care units during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This narrative review summarises the current knowledge concerning the challenges associated with assessment of delirium in patients with COVID-19 by ICU nurses, and the role and tasks in the personalised approach to patients with COVID-19.

Comparison of two behavioural pain scales for the assessment of procedural pain: A systematic review

AIM

To examine the clinical utility and measurement properties of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool and the Behavioural Pain Scale when used to assess pain during procedures in the intensive care unit.

DESIGN

A systematic review was conducted, guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsychINFO (01 October 2019). Study selection, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality were performed by a pair of authors working independently. Different psychometric properties were addressed: inter-rater reliability, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, discriminant validity and criterion validity.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included. Both Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool and the Behavioural Pain Scale showed good reliability and validity and were good options for assessing pain during painful procedures with intensive care unit patients unable to self-report on pain. The Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool is to be preferred since this tool was shown to have particularly good reliability and validity in assessing pain during procedures, but the Behavioural Pain Scale is an appropriate alternative.

Assessing pain in critically ill brain-injured patients: a psychometric comparison of 3 pain scales and videopupillometry

Three clinical scales (the Nociception Coma Scale adapted for Intubated patients [NCS-I], its Revised version [NCS-R-I], and the Behavioral Pain Scale [BPS]) and videopupillometry were compared for measuring pain in intubated, noncommunicating, critically ill, brain-injured patients. Pain assessment was performed before, during, just after, and 5 minutes after 3 procedures: the reference non-nociceptive procedure (assessment of the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale) and 2 nociceptive procedures (turning and tracheal suctioning). The primary endpoint was construct validity (discriminant and criterion validation), determined by comparing pain measurements between different times/procedures. Secondary endpoints were internal consistency, inter-rater reliability, and feasibility. Fifty patients (54% women, median age 63 years [56-68]) were included 13 [7-24] days after brain injury (76% hemorrhagic or ischemic strokes). All tools increased significantly more (P < 0.001) during the nociceptive procedures vs the non-nociceptive procedure. The BPS was the only pain tool that did not increase significantly during the non-nociceptive procedure (P = 0.41), suggesting that it was the most discriminant tool. The BPS, NCS-I, and NCS-R-I were good predictors of nociception with areas under the curves ≥0.96, contrary to videopupillometry (area under the curve = 0.67). The BPS, NCS-I, and NCS-I-R had high inter-rater reliabilities (weighted kappa = 0.86, 0.82 and 0.84, respectively). Internal consistency was moderate (>0.60) for all pain scales. Factor analysis represented a majority of information on a first dimension, with motor domains represented on a second dimension. Scale feasibility was better for the NCS-I and NCS-R-I than for the BPS. In conclusion, the BPS, NCS-I, and NCS-R-I are valid, reliable, and acceptable pain scales for use in intubated critically ill, brain-injured patients, unlike videopupillometry. Future research requires tool design centered on domains of observation adapted to this very specific population.

Behavioral Pain Scale and Critical Care Pain Observation Tool for pain evaluation in orotracheally tubed critical patients. A systematic review of the literature

Objective:

To describe the appropriateness of two behavioral scales, the Behavioral Pain Scale and the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool, for pain assessment in orotracheally intubated patients admitted to intensive care units.

Method:

Using the methodology recommended by the Cochrane Center, a systematic literature review was performed in the electronic database EBSCO Host (CINAHL Complete; MEDLINE® Complete; Nursing & Allied Health Collection: Comprehensive; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; Cochrane Methodology Register; Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts; MedicLatina). Two searches were conducted using the following English terms in the search field: “behavioral pain scale” AND “critical care pain observation tool” AND “behavioral pain scale” OR “critical care pain observation tool”. Two independent reviewers performed the critical evaluation and data extraction and synthesis.

Results:

Fifteen studies were included that showed that the Behavioral Pain Scale and the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool are valid and reliable scales for pain assessment in orotracheally intubated patients admitted to the intensive care unit. The scales showed similar psychometric properties and good reliability.

Conclusion:

Both scales are adequate for assessing pain in orotracheally intubated patients admitted to intensive care units; however, they exhibit limitations in specific populations, such as trauma, burn and neurosurgical patients. Further studies on the subject and in specific populations are suggested.

A Psychometric Analysis Update of Behavioral Pain Assessment Tools for Noncommunicative, Critically Ill Adults

This is an updated, comprehensive review of the psychometric properties of behavioral pain assessment tools for use with noncommunicative, critically ill adults. Articles were searched in 5 health databases. A total of 106 articles were analyzed, including 54 recently published papers. Nine behavioral pain assessment tools developed for noncommunicative critically ill adults and 4 tools developed for other non-communicative populations were included. The scale development process, reliability, validity, feasibility, and clinical utility were analyzed using a 0 to 20 scoring system, and quality of evidence was also evaluated. The Behavioral Pain Scale, the Behavioral Pain Scale-Nonintubated, and the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool remain the tools with the strongest psychometric properties, with validation testing having been conducted in multiple countries and various languages. Other tools may be good alternatives, but additional research on them is necessary.

Clinical Utility of the Behavioral Pain Assessment Tool in Patients Admitted in the Intensive Care Unit

Introduction

Unnoticed and unrelieved pain is one of the main sources of psychological and physiological stress for intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The eight-item behavior pain assessment tool (BPAT) is a multicountry validated tool to assess pain in ICU patients. However, its feasibility and clinical utility for ICU patients in India need further research.

Aims and objectives

The Aims and objectives of the study were to assess pain using BPAT and its clinical utility in pain assessment and management in ICU patients.

Materials and methods

Following ethical approval, 400 consecutive adult patients admitted in the ICUs in a tertiary care teaching hospital were assessed for pain severity using BPAT at intake, baseline pain and procedural pain. Patients <18 years and in deep coma on the Glasgow coma scale were excluded from the study. The patients with BPAT score ≥4 were given opioid analgesic, and their pain was reassessed after 2-3 hours. A feedback regarding feasibility and clinical utility was filled by the doctors.

Results

High interrater agreement for BPAT was observed with excellent kappa coefficients (>0.85) for each item. The BPAT significantly guided the pain management (p < 0.0001). More than 90% of doctors found BPAT easy to understand and use. In most of the cases (95.5%), doctors agreed that BPAT can improve the clinical management of ICU patients.

Conclusion

The BPAT is a reliable, brief, and an easy-to-use pain assessment tool, which clinicians can use for guiding pain assessment and management in the ICU setting on a routine basis.

Clinical significance

We recommend implementing BPAT in the clinical practice for better pain assessment and control in ICU patients.

How to cite this article

Mitra S, Jain K, Singh J, Saxena P, Nyima T, Selvam SR, et al. Clinical Utility of the Behavioral Pain Assessment Tool in Patients Admitted in the Intensive Care Unit. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(8):695-700.

Pain Assessment in the Patient Unable to Self-Report: Clinical Practice Recommendations in Support of the ASPMN 2019 Position Statement

Pain is a subjective experience, unfortunately, some patients cannot provide a self-report of pain verbally, in writing, or by other means. In patients who are unable to self-report pain, other strategies must be used to infer pain and evaluate interventions. In support of the ASPMN position statement "Pain Assessment in the Patient Unable to Self-Report", this paper provides clinical practice recommendations for five populations in which difficulty communicating pain often exists: neonates, toddlers and young children, persons with intellectual disabilities, critically ill/unconscious patients, older adults with advanced dementia, and patients at the end of life. Nurses are integral to ensuring assessment and treatment of these vulnerable populations.

Strategies for Pain Assessment in Adult Patients With Delirium: A Scoping Review

CONTEXT

Pain and delirium are highly prevalent in the same patient groups. Disturbances in attention, awareness, and cognition are characteristics for delirium and can compromise pain assessment.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to examine and map models and understandings of pain and delirium as well as pain assessment instruments and strategies for adult patients with delirium.

METHODS

A scoping review of all publications that reported on pain assessment in adult patients with delirium was conducted with no time and language constraints, searching Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase, and PsycINFO and systematically assessing for inclusion. Standardized data extraction and a narrative synthesis followed.

RESULTS

A total of 90 publications were included in the final analysis. Despite being recommended for practice, no evidence for the use of self-report or behavioral pain assessment instruments in patients with delirium was identified, with the exception of limited evidence for the validity of the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool and Behavioral Pain Scale in delirious intensive care patients. Proxy ratings of pain and comprehensive pain assessment hierarchies were also recommended, but not supported by evidence. Current models and/or understandings of pain and delirium were not applied in most publications.

CONCLUSION

The current literature is insufficient to guide clinical practice in pain assessment in patients with delirium. Future research will be needed to address the validity of existing pain assessment instruments, apply theoretical and conceptual understandings of pain and delirium, and build on prior studies to close evidence gaps.

Validating a pain assessment tool in heterogeneous ICU patients: Is it possible?

BACKGROUND

Non-communicative adult ICU patients are vulnerable to inadequate pain management with potentially severe consequences. In German-speaking countries, there is limited availability of a validated pain assessment tool for this population.

AIM

The aim of this observational study was to test the German version of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) in a heterogeneous adult ICU population.

METHODS

The CPOT's feasibility for clinical use was evaluated via a questionnaire. For validity and reliability testing, the CPOT was compared with the Behavioural Pain Scale (BPS) and patient's self-report in 60 patients during 480 observations simultaneously performed by two raters.

RESULTS

The feasibility evaluation demonstrated high satisfaction with clinical usability (85% of responses 4 or 5 on a 5-point Likert scale). The CPOT revealed excellent criterion validity [agreement between CPOT and BPS 94.0%, correlation of CPOT and BPS sum scores r = 0.91 (P < .05), agreement of CPOT with patient self-report 81.4%], good discriminant validity [mean difference of CPOT scores between at rest and non-painful stimulus 0.33 (P < .029), mean difference of CPOT scores between at rest, and painful stimulus 2.19 (P < .001)], for a CPOT cut-off score of >2 a high sensitivity and specificity (93% and 84%), high positive predictive value (85%), and a high negative predictive value (93%). The CPOT showed acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.79) and high inter-rater reliability [90% agreement, no differences in CPOT sum scores in 64.2% of observations, and correlation for CPOT sum scores r = 0.72 (P < .05)]. Self-report obtained in patients with delirium did not correlate with the CPOT rating in 62% of patients.

CONCLUSION

This is the first validation study of the CPOT evaluating all of the described validity dimensions, including feasibility, at once. The results are congruent with previous validations of the CPOT with homogeneous samples and show that it is possible to validate a tool with a heterogeneous sample. Further research should be done to improve pain assessment and treatment in ICU patients with delirium.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The German CPOT version can be recommended for ICUs in German-speaking countries.

Impact of a nurse engagement intervention on pain, agitation and delirium assessment in a community intensive care unit

Background

In 2013, the Society of Critical Care Medicine published a revised version of the ICU Pain, Agitation, and Delirium (PAD) guidelines. Immobility and sleep were subsequently added in 2018. Despite the well-established advantages of implementing these guidelines, adoption and adherence remain suboptimal. This is especially true in community settings, where PAD assessment is performed less often, and the implementation of PAD guidelines has not yet been studied. The purpose of this prospective interventional study is to evaluate the effect of a multifaceted nurse engagement intervention on PAD assessment in a community intensive care unit (ICU).

Methods

All patients admitted to our community ICU for over 24 hours were included. A 20-week baseline audit was performed, followed by the intervention, and a 20-week postintervention audit. The intervention consisted of a survey, focus groups and education sessions. Primary outcomes included rates of daily PAD assessment using validated tools.

Results

There were improvements in the number of patients with at least one assessment per day of pain (67.5% vs 59.3%, p=0.04), agitation (93.1% vs 78.7%, p<0.001) and delirium (54.2% vs 39.4%, p<0.001), and the number of patients with target Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale ordered (63.1% vs 46.8%, p=0.002). There was a decrease in the rate of physical restraint use (10.0% vs 30.9%, p<0.001) and no change in self-extubation rate (0.9% vs 2.5%, p=0.2).

Conclusion

The implementation of a multifaceted nurse engagement intervention has the potential to improve rates of PAD assessment in community ICUs. Screening rates in our ICU remain suboptimal despite these improvements. We plan to implement multidisciplinary interventions targeting physicians, nurses and families to close the observed care gap.

Validation of a Chinese version critical-care pain observation tool in nonintubated and intubated critically ill patients: Two cross-sectional studies

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To validate the Chinese version of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) in nonintubated and intubated ICU patients.

BACKGROUND

While CPOT was found to have the best psychometric properties among objective pain assessment scales, there is no Chinese version CPOT for nonintubated patients.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional design was used in these two observational studies.

METHODS

Seventy-six nonintubated patients and 53 intubated patients were assessed to examine internal consistency, criterion-related and discriminative validity of CPOT in the first study. Pain assessment during low pain condition as well as increased pain condition was performed by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and the Chinese version COPT. Forty nonintubated patients and 43 intubated patients were assessed to examine inter-rater reliability in the second study. A bedside nurse and a researcher independently executed paired pain assessments with CPOT in the same conditions. The STROBE Statement was followed to guide these studies.

RESULTS

The Cronbach's α in nonintubated patients and intubated patients was 0.903-0.930 and 0.868-0.870. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) in nonintubated patients ranged from 0.959-0.982, and the ICC in intubated patients ranged from 0.947-0.959, confirming the inter-rater reliability. The moderately positive Pearson's correlations between CPOT and NRS scores (r = 0.757-0.838 in nonintubated patients, r = 0.574-0.705 in intubated patients) indicated the criterion-related validity. A significant increase in CPOT scores in the increased pain condition compared with those acquired in the low pain condition verified the discriminative validity.

CONCLUSIONS

The Chinese version of CPOT was presented to be valid and reliable for both nonintubated and intubated critically ill adults, which could be applicable for pain assessment in patients in ICU.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

This study provides an applicable pain assessment tool for both nonintubated patients and intubated patients in ICU.

Analgesia nociception index for the assessment of pain in critically ill patients: a diagnostic accuracy study

Background

Behavioural pain tools are used in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients unable to self-report their pain-intensity but need sustained efforts to educate and train the ICU team because of the subjective nature of these clinical tools. This study measured the validity and performance of an electrophysiological monitoring tool based on the spectral analysis of heart rate variability, the Analgesia Nociception Index (ANI) which varies from 0 (minimal parasympathetic tone, maximal stress-response and pain) to 100 (maximal parasympathetic tone, minimal stress-response and pain).

Methods

Mean-ANI (ANIm) and Instant-ANI (ANIi) were continuously recorded then compared with the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) before, during and after routine care procedures in critically-ill non-comatose patients.

Results

969 assessments were performed in 110 patients. ANIi was the most discriminative pain tool. It was significantly correlated with BPS (r=-0.30; 95%CI -0.37 to -0.25; P<0.001). For an ANIi threshold of 42.5, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were respectively 61.4%, 77.4%, 37.0%, and 90.4%. Compared with the BPS, ANIi had no significantly different ability to change during turning and tracheal-suctioning but changed significantly more during dressing change. ANIi increased independently with age, obesity and severity of illness, and controlled mechanical-ventilation, vasopressors use and analgesia. ANIi decreased independently when vigilance status and respiratory rate increased. ANIm demonstrated poor psychometric properties to detect pain.

Conclusions

Despite low sensitivity/specificity, ANIi≥43 had a Negative-Predictive-Value of 90%. Hence ANIi may be of highest benefit for excluding significant pain. A randomized controlled trial should compare sedation-analgesia protocols based on ANIi to presently recommended behavioural-pain-tools.

Regional analgesia techniques for pain management in patients admitted to the intensive care unit

Controlling pain should be a priority in the clinical practice of intensive care units (ICUs). Monomodal analgesic approaches, such as the administration of opioids, are widely employed; however, the widespread use of opioids has catastrophic consequences, given their multiple side effects and the development of dependence. Regional analgesia (RA), with single or continuous dosing using neuraxial and peripheral catheters, can play an important role in multimodal analgesia for management of pain in critical care patients. RA provides superior pain control, as compared to systemic treatments, and is associated with a lower rate of side effects. Nevertheless, RA remains underused in ICUs. Many critically ill, post-surgical or traumatically injured patients would benefit from these techniques. For these reasons, we aim to establish a set of potential indications integrating the use of RA in analgesia protocols routinely used in ICUs. We performed a review of literature sources with contrasted evidence levels to present RA techniques and their potential applications in ICU patients.

To assess patients pain in intensive care: developing and testing the Swedish version of the Behavioural Pain Scale

OBJECTIVES

The Behavioural Pain Scale has previously been translated into Swedish and psychometrically tested. One of the domains- 'compliance with ventilation'- did not show equally as good psychometric proprieties as the other domains, which led to the question whether a development of that domain would be beneficial. This study aimed to develop the domain of 'breathing pattern' in the Swedish version of the Behavioural Pain Scale and then test the instrument for discriminant validity, inter-rater reliability and criterion validity.

METHOD

The domain 'breathing pattern' was developed and included when the Swedish version of the Behavioural Pain Scale was psychometrically tested in 360 paired assessments.

RESULTS

The instrument showed discriminant validity through a significant positive change on the scale before and during turning and inter-rater reliability with an absence of significant disagreement on the scale between the paired assessments. The developed domain had a better result in discriminant validity than the original domain. The instrument also showed higher sensitivity in discriminating pain compared to assessment without an instrument.

CONCLUSION

The Swedish version of the Behavioural Pain Scale, with a developed domain for 'breathing pattern' showed to be a reliable instrument for pain assessment in the adult intensive-care patient.

Pain Behaviour Scale (PaBS): An Exploratory Study of Reliability and Construct Validity in a Chronic Low Back Pain Population

Objectives

To examine the interrater and intrarater reliability and construct validity of the Pain Behaviour Scale during standard physical performance tests in people with chronic low back pain and to confirm the test-retest reliability of the physical performance tests in this population. The Pain Behaviour Scale (PaBS) is an observational scale that was recently designed to uniquely measure both the presence and severity of observed pain behaviours.

Methods

Twenty-two participants with chronic low back pain were observed during performance of five physical performance tests by two raters. Pain behaviours were assessed using the Pain Behaviour Scale. The Visual Analogue Scale and Modified Oswestry Disability Index were used to measure pain and disability, respectively. Descriptive statistics were used to report demographic features of participants. Reliability was analyzed using ICCs. Rater agreement was analyzed using the weighted Cohen's kappa. Correlations between PaBS, self-reported measures, and physical performance tests were calculated using Pearson's product-moment correlations.

Results

The PaBS demonstrated excellent interrater (ICC₂,₁ = 1.0, 95% CI: 0.9 to 1.0) and intrarater (ICC_3,1= 0.9, 95% CI: 0.8 to 1.0) reliability. Component physical performance tests (i.e., time and distance) demonstrated good test-retest (0.6–1.0) reliability. Perfect agreement in the reporting of pain behaviours was found (95–100%). Correlations between pain behaviour severity and pain intensity (r = 0.6) and disability (r = 0.6) were moderate. Moderate correlations were found between pain behaviours and physical performance tests in sit to stand (r = 0.5), trunk flexion (r = 0.4), timed up and go (r = 0.4), and 50-foot walk (r = 0.4).

Conclusion

The Pain Behaviour Scale is a valid and reliable tool for measuring the presence and severity of pain behaviour, and the physical performance tests are reliable tests.

Evaluation of Observational and Behavioural Pain Assessment Tools in Nonverbal Intubated Critically Adult Patients after Open - Heart Surgery: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Over 70% of patients hospitalised in an intensive care unit (ICU) often experience moderate to severe pain due to pre-existing diseases, trauma, surgery, aggressive procedures, and routine ICU care. Many patients hospitalised in ICU are not able to speak and express their pain due to various causes, including mechanical ventilation, reduced consciousness, and administration of sedative drugs. Therefore, the use of observational and behavioural pain tools is recommended in this group of patients given their inability to express pain.

AIM

To examine the existing observational and behavioural tools for assessment of in Nonverbal Intubated Critically Adult Patients after Open-Heart Surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review of available observational and behavioural tools for assessment of pain was undertaken using the COSMIN checklist. A literature search was conducted using the following databases: Ovid, Science Direct, Scopus, PubMed, and CINHAL databases, Google Scholar search engine as well as Persian resources Sid, Magiran, Iran doc, and IranMedex up to the end of 2017 were reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 47 studies that had examined five tools used in intensive care units after cardiac surgery in patients under mechanical ventilation were reviewed. Each of the five tools included behavioural and observational items, and only one tool had physiological items. All the tools had been evaluated regarding validity and reliability. In the three tools, sensitivity, specificity, responsiveness, and satisfaction were considered.

CONCLUSION

Based on available evidence and investigations, CPOT and BPS tools have good validity and reliability to be used in pain assessment in Nonverbal Intubated Critically Adult Patients after Open-Heart Surgery. The NVPS tool requires more studies to be further confirmed before the assessment of pain in this group of patients.

Pain measurement techniques: spotlight on mechanically ventilated patients

Background

Procedural pain is a frequent problem in intensive care units (ICUs). For that, pain assessment has been increasingly introduced to the ICU professional’s routine, and studies have been developed to show the relevance of measuring pain in critically ill patients.

Objective

This review aimed to describe pain measurement techniques for mechanically ventilated adult patients based on evidence and already published.

Method

Systematic literature search was performed on PubMed and Google Scholar. Keywords “pain”, “pain measurement”, “intensive care units” and “respiration, artificial” were combined to the Boolean operator AND. No language or publication year was limited in this search. The purpose and method of all papers were analyzed and only studies which described pain assessment in mechanically ventilated patients were included in this review.

Results

Objective methods were found in the literature to assess pain in mechanically ventilated adults. Behavioral scales were the most used method for pain measurement in noncommunicative patients. Vital signs were used, but the reliability of this method was questioned. Pupillometry, bispectral index and skin conductance were found and described as pain assessment methods.

Conclusion

This review showed that objective measures, as behavioral scales, are the gold standard tools to measure pain intensity in noncommunicative subjects. These data contribute to professionals’ knowledge about ICU pain measurement and emphasize its importance and consequences for adequate pain management.

Validation of Two Pain Assessment Tools Using a Standardized Nociceptive Stimulation in Critically Ill Adults

CONTEXT

The Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) or the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) are recommended in practice guidelines for pain assessment in critically ill adults unable to self-report. However, their use in another language requires cultural adaptation and validation testing.

OBJECTIVES

Cross-cultural adaptation of the CPOT and BPS English versions into Brazilian Portuguese, and their validation by comparing behavioral scores during rest, standardized nociceptive stimulation by pressure algometry (SNSPA), and turning were completed. In addition, we explored clinical variables that could predict the CPOT and BPS scores.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted with 168 medical-surgical critically ill adults unable to self-report in the intensive care unit. Two nurses were trained to use the CPOT and BPS Brazilian Portuguese versions at the following assessments: 1) baseline at rest, 2) after SNSPA with a pressure of 14 kgf/cm², 3) during turning, and 4) 15 minutes after turning.

RESULTS

Inter-rater reliability of nurses' CPOT and BPS scores was supported by high weighted kappa >0.7. Discriminative validation was supported with higher CPOT and BPS scores during SNSPA or turning in comparison to baseline (P < 0.001). The Glasgow Coma Scale score was the only variable that predicted CPOT and BPS scores with explained variance of 44.5% and 55.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The use of the Brazilian CPOT and BPS versions showed good reliability and validity in critically ill adults unable to self-report. A standardized procedure, the SNSPA, was used for the first time in the validation process of these tools and helped us improve the validation process.

Psychometric Assessment of Physiologic and Behavioral Pain Indicators in Polish Versions of the Pain Assessment Scales

BACKGROUND

There is an urgent need to prepare a reliable and accurate tool for pain assessment in patients who are unable to self-report. Translating pain assessment scales into foreign languages requires further validation testing.

AIM

The aim of the study was to carry out psychometric assessment of behavioral and physiological indicators of pain included in two Polish versions of pain assessment scales, the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) and the original Adult Non-Verbal Pain Scale (NVPS).

DESIGN

A prospective repeated-measure descriptive study was conducted.

SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-eight adult non-communicative mechanically ventilated ICU patients were included in the study. The study took place in five hospitals in Poland, one 15-bed general ICU of a university teaching hospital and four 6-bed medical ICUs of district hospitals.

METHODS

Pain assessment was conducted at rest, during non-painful and painful procedures independently by two observers.

RESULTS

Internal consistency of the Polish version of the scales was below the expected 0.7 value (Cronbach's alpha for the BPS 0.6883 and NVPS 0.6697). Principal component analysis showed that for the Polish version of the BPS, all three domains formed one separate factor (63.9%), while in the case of the NVPS two separate factors were found, one covering four domains of the NVPS (47.1%) and the other exclusively covering the category of Vital sign (20.2%). There was a significant difference between the pain scores with the NVPS (χ² = 228.95 p < .001) and the BPS (χ² = 236.46 p < .001) during three observation phases. There were no significant differences between scores obtained by different raters. The analysis of variance demonstrated a statistically significant difference in the values of physiological indicators of pain (SBP, DBP, MAP) between observation phases.

CONCLUSIONS

The Polish version of the BPS has better psychometric properties than the Polish version of the NVPS. It is necessary to define precisely the descriptors used in the scales and to implement a staff training program.

Validation of the behavioral pain scale to assess pain intensity in adult, intubated postcardiac surgery patients: A cohort observational study - POL-BPS

Patients after cardiac surgery experience significant pain, but cannot communicate effectively due to opioid analgesia and sedation. Identification of pain with validated behavioral observation tool in patients with limited abilities to self-report pain improves quality of care and prevents suffering. Aim of this study was to validate Polish version of behavioral pain scale (BPS) in intubated, mechanically ventilated patients sedated with dexmedetomidine and morphine after cardiac surgery.Prospective observational cohort study included postoperative cardiac surgery patients, both sedated with dexmedetomidine and unsedated, observed at rest, during a nociceptive procedure (position change) and 10 minutes after intervention. Pain control was achieved using morphine infusion and nonopioid coanalgesia. Pain intensity evaluation included self-report by patient using numeric rating scale (NRS) and BPS assessments carried out by 2 blinded observers.A total of 708 assessments were performed in 59 patients (mean age 68 years), predominantly men (44/59, 75%). Results showed very good interrater correlation between raters (interrater correlation scores >0.87). Self-report NRS scores were obtained from all patients. Correlation between NRS and BPS was relatively strong during nociceptive procedures in all patients for rater A and rater B (Spearman R > 0.65, P < .001). Both mean NRS and BPS scores were significantly higher during nociceptive procedures as compared to assessments at rest, in both sedated and unsedated patients (P < .001).The results of this observational study show that the Polish translation of BPS can be regarded as a useful and validated tool for pain assessment in adult intubated patients. This instrument can be used in both unsedated and sedated cardiac surgery patients with limited communication abilities.

Reliability and Validity of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool: A Rapid Synthesis of Evidence

Staff in a tertiary hospital critical care unit in Doha, Qatar, suggested that the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) would be a better tool for assessing pain in ventilated and sedated patients than current local practice. We undertook a rapid synthesis of evidence to establish whether current research supports use of CPOT for assessing pain in ventilated and sedated patients in a critical care setting. CPOT has been shown in reviews and more recent primary studies to be reliable and valid for most patients unable to self-report in critical care settings. This finding is supported by several guidelines. Studies also suggest that CPOT is feasible for use in research and clinical practice though training of observers is important. Further research may be warranted to strengthen current evidence, particularly in patients with neurological trauma.

Validation of the Polish version of the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) to assess pain intensity in adult, intubated intensive care unit patients: the POL-CPOT study

INTRODUCTION

Pain in the critically ill affects nearly 50% of patients. In patients unable to self-report pain, behavioural scales are used. The aim of this study was to validate the Polish version of the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The prospective observational cohort study included patients observed during non-nociceptive and nociceptive procedures, at rest, during the intervention, and 15 min after each intervention. Assessments included self-report by patients and CPOT assessment carried out by two blinded observers.

RESULTS

A total of 71 patients were included in the study (mean age: 66 years), predominantly males (50/71, 70%), mean APACHE II score 26.04 ±10.56. Results showed an excellent inter-rater correlation (ICC) between raters (ICC scores > 0.97). Self-report NRS (numeric rating scale) scores were available from 58/71 patients (82%). Patients' self-reported pain and CPOT showed a very strong correlation (Spearman's R > 0.85, p < 0.0001). The CPOT has high diagnostic value for detection of presence of patients' self-reported pain (ROC AUC = 0.938 for rater A and 0.951 for rater B, p < 0.0001). CPOT score ≥ 2 is an optimal cut-off to detect pain during a nociceptive procedure. A significantly higher mean CPOT score during a nociceptive procedure as compared to a non-nociceptive procedure or at rest was found (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that the Polish version of the CPOT can be used to assess pain in critically ill patients with no hypnotic, opioid-based analgo-sedation. Polish CPOT scores correlated well with patients' self-reported presence of pain and showed excellent inter-rater reliability. This makes the Polish version of the CPOT a reliable pain assessment tool.

An Association Between Pain and American Association of Respiratory Care 2010 Guidelines During Tracheal Suctioning

INTRODUCTION

Tracheal suctioning is recalled by mechanically ventilated patients as the most painful procedure during their stay in the intensive care unit.

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the implementation of American Association of Respiratory Care suction guidelines positively affects the levels of patients' pain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a prospective observational study on adult patients admitted to 2 general intensive care units. Pain levels in sedated mechanically ventilated patients were recorded before, during, and after tracheal suctioning, using the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT).

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients were enrolled, with a mean age of 61.72 (±18.46) years. Median CPOT value was 0 (quartile 1 [Q1] [25%], 0; quartile 3 [Q3] [75%], 0; min, 0; max, 2) during the procedure. The Critical Care Pain Observation Tool reached a median value of 3, while 5 minutes after suctioning. Postprocedural CPOT median score was 0 (Q1 [25%], 0; Q3 [75%], 0; min, 0; max, 2). The median number of passes during suctioning was 1 (Q1, 1; Q3, 2). The sizes of suction catheters used in the recorded procedures were as follows: 12F in 27 cases (57%), 14F in 18 cases (38%), and 10F in 2 cases (5%). The median size of the endotracheal tube was 7.5 mm (Q1, 7.5; Q3, 8). The correct ratio between endotracheal tube diameter and suction catheter was used in 24 procedures (51%).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the low number of patients, this study showed that the implementation of the American Association of Respiratory Care 2010 endotracheal suctioning guidelines into practice helps to reduce procedural-induced pain. Therefore, training and continuing education are important for clinical staff performing tracheal suctioning.

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.

The Critical care Pain Observation Tool is reliable in non-agitated but not in agitated intubated patients

OBJECTIVE

The Critical-Care Pain.

OBSERVATION

Tool is one of the instruments developed to assess pain in patients who are unable to communicate verbally. The study aimed to survey the psychometric properties of Critical-Care Pain.

OBSERVATION

Tool in four groups of non-verbal patients according to their Richmond Agitation Sedation Score (RASS).

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

65 critically ill patients (medical, surgical, trauma) were assessed using the critical care pain observation tool on six occasions (before, during and after nociceptive and non-nociceptive procedures). Patients were divided into four groups according to their RASS score: 1. All patients (RASS -3 to +2), 2. Sedated patients (RASS -3 to -1), 3. Restless patients (RASS +1), 4. Agitated patients (RASS +2).

RESULTS

Discriminant and criterion validity, confirmatory factor analysis and internal reliability showed good validity and reliability in the critical care pain observation tool in all groups except agitated patients. The results showed that, in general, the CPOT has good version of the critical care pain observation tool has good psychometric properties to evaluate pain in non-verbal patients admitted to intensive care units who have a RASS score ranging from -3 to +1, but it is not a good tool to evaluate pain in patients who are agitated according to RASS.