Pain measurement in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: Behavioral Pain Scale versus Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Rijkenberg ◽  
W. Stilma ◽  
H. Endeman ◽  
R.J. Bosman ◽  
H.M. Oudemans-van Straaten
2009 ◽  
Vol 35 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gérald Chanques ◽  
Jean-François Payen ◽  
Grégoire Mercier ◽  
Sylvie de Lattre ◽  
Eric Viel ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benedikt Zujalovic ◽  
Benjamin Mayer ◽  
Steffen Walter ◽  
Sascha Gruss ◽  
Ronald Stitz ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Pain detection and treatment is a major challenge in the care of critically ill patients. However, in addition to the risk of analgesic undersupply, there is also the risk of overanalgesia. In the perioperative context, the measurement of the nociceptive flexion reflex threshold has become established for measuring the level of analgesia. To date, however, it is unclear whether measurement of NFRT can be usefully applied to noncommunicating, ventilated, and analgosedated ICU patients. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate whether NFRT measurement correlates with the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) in critically ill, analgosedated, and mechanically ventilated patients and whether it can also detect possible overanalgesia.Methods In this prospective, observational, single-center study, 114 patients were included. All patients were admitted to the surgical Intensive Care Unit of the University hospital Ulm, Germany. First measurements of the NFRT and the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) were conducted within 12 hours after admission. In the further observation period, a structured pain assessment was performed at least twice daily until extubation (Group A: BPS + NFRT, Group B: BPS). Univariate analysis was performed to evaluate possible associations between NFRT measurement and baseline characteristics. Furthermore, mixed linear regression modeling was used to evaluate possible effects of administered analgesics or sedatives on NFRT. Results NFRT correlates negatively with the Behavioral Pain Scale. NFRT was almost twice as high in patients with a RASS of -5 compared with patients with a RASS ≥ -4 (RASS -5 - NFRT: 59.40 vs. RASS -4 - NFRT: 29.00, p < 0.001). By means of NFRT measurement, potential overanalgesia could not be detected.Conclusion The NFRT measurement reliably correlates negatively with the Behavioral Pain Scale in critically ill patients. In patients with RASS scores ≤ -4, in whom analgesia level is often difficult to assess, NFRT measurement provides guidance in the assessment of nociceptive processes. However, in order to detect possible overanalgesia and to derive therapeutic consequences, a defined stimulus threshold must be determined for the critically ill patient, above which the absence of pain can be safely assumed.Trial Registration Retrospectively registered at German Clinical Trials Register, registration number DRKS00021149, date of registration: March 26, 2020. https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00021149


2005 ◽  
Vol 101 (5) ◽  
pp. 1470-1476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Youn??s A??ssaoui ◽  
Amine Ali Zeggwagh ◽  
A??cha Zekraoui ◽  
Khalid Abidi ◽  
Redouane Abouqal

Ból ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 27-35
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Gutysz-Wojnicka ◽  
Dorota Ozga ◽  
Ewa Mayzner-Zawadzka

“Gold standard” in the assessment of pain is patient’s subjective assessment by means of standardized numerical, analog-visual or verbal scales. Unconscious, sedated, mechanically ventilated patients are able to subjectively assess pain in this way. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of pain, agitation and delirium in adult patients in the intensive care unit developed by a working group of the American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCCM) state that adult patients treated in the ICU routinely experience pain at rest and during routine care. The guidelines recommend routine monitoring of pain in all adult patients in the ICU using the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) or Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT). Cultural adaptation was conducted in Poland, psychometric properties of Polish version of Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) were evaluated. Internal consistency determined by Cronbach’s alpha amounted to 0.6883. The correlation coefficients between items of the scale and the sum score in the pain phase were in the range 0.27-0.28. The analysis of principal components confirmed that all the components of the scale respectively, the face, the upper limbs, synchronization with the respirator are one factor and explain 63.9% of the rating variation, while discriminatory accuracy of the scale was unconfirmed. The value of pain assessment using the Polish version of BPS increased significantly, also in the case of routine painless procedures, most likely due to other factors. That prevented the unambiguous interpretation of the results of the pain assessment and enforced additional data from other sources in the assessment of pain. The reason for the lack of discriminant accuracy can be vague operationalization of the scale indicators especially in the category: Face and Synchronization with the ventilator and the lack of adequate training for personnel in scale application. The aim of the study was to prepare the Polish version of Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) with more favorable psychometric properties. Based on the analysis of the literature individual scale indicators included in the categories of Face and Synchronization with the ventilator and the scheme of their scoring were re-defined. The result of the study is modified Polish version of BPS. Conclusions: The validation process of the research tool is not a one-time process. The implementation of the scale into clinical practice is required as well as further monitoring of its reliability and validity indicators. It is necessary to implement the system of personnel training in BPS application


2015 ◽  
Vol 72 (1) ◽  
pp. 205-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignacio Latorre-Marco ◽  
Montserrat Solís-Muñoz ◽  
María Acevedo-Nuevo ◽  
María Leonor Hernández-Sánchez ◽  
Candelas López-López ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 453-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rima H. Bouajram ◽  
Christian M. Sebat ◽  
Dawn Love ◽  
Erin L. Louie ◽  
Machelle D. Wilson ◽  
...  

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.


Author(s):  
Habib Md Reazaul Karim

Respiratory support in terms of mechanical ventilation is very common in critically ill patients. These patients are often hemodynamically unstable too. The mechanophysiology of mechanical ventilation also affects other organ system and needs assessment and management accordingly. The procedure is not devoid of complication. It also has potential to failure to achieve the treatment objective requiring frequent assessment and adjustment. There is a very close temporal relationship between patients monitoring and management decision in critically ill patients in critical care practice. Early and appropriate information from monitoring can lead to better outcome including reduced mortality. The present review is intended to briefly highlight the current opinions and strategies for cardio circulatory and respiratory monitoring in such patients in critical care unit. Received: 4 Jun 2018Reviewed: 6 Jun 2018Accepted: 13 Sep 2018 Citation: Karim HMR. Cardio circulatory and respiratory monitoring of mechanically ventilated critically ill patients. Anaesth Pain & Intensive Care 2018;22 Suppl 1:S142-S149


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document