Heart & lung : the journal of critical care · 2015
Development of a pain management algorithm for intensive care units.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Olsen Brita F, Rustøen Tone, Sandvik Leiv, Miaskowski Christine, Jacobsen Morten, Valeberg Berit T
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To develop a pain management algorithm for intensive care unit (ICU) patients and to evaluate the psychometric properties of the translated tools used in the algorithm.
BACKGROUND: Many ICU patients experience pain. However, an evidence-based algorithm for pain management does not exist.
METHODS: Literature review, expert panel, and pilot testing were used to develop the algorithm. The tools were evaluated for inter-rater reliability between two nurses. Discriminant validity was evaluated by comparing pain during turning and rest.
RESULTS: An algorithm was developed. The Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) and the Behavioral Pain Scale-Non Intubated (BPS-NI) discriminated between pain scores during turning and rest. Inter-rater reliability for the BPS varied from moderate (0.46) to very good (1.00). Inter-rater reliability for the BPS-NI varied from fair (0.21) to good (0.63).
CONCLUSIONS: The content of the pain management algorithm is consistent with the latest clinical practice guideline recommendations. It may be a useful tool to improve pain assessment and management in adult ICU patients.
BACKGROUND: Many ICU patients experience pain. However, an evidence-based algorithm for pain management does not exist.
METHODS: Literature review, expert panel, and pilot testing were used to develop the algorithm. The tools were evaluated for inter-rater reliability between two nurses. Discriminant validity was evaluated by comparing pain during turning and rest.
RESULTS: An algorithm was developed. The Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) and the Behavioral Pain Scale-Non Intubated (BPS-NI) discriminated between pain scores during turning and rest. Inter-rater reliability for the BPS varied from moderate (0.46) to very good (1.00). Inter-rater reliability for the BPS-NI varied from fair (0.21) to good (0.63).
CONCLUSIONS: The content of the pain management algorithm is consistent with the latest clinical practice guideline recommendations. It may be a useful tool to improve pain assessment and management in adult ICU patients.