Pain Assessment Documentation After Opioid Administration at a Community Teaching Hospital

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-185
Author(s):  
Megan E. Phillips ◽  
Rod A. Gilmore ◽  
Melody C. Sheffield ◽  
Stephanie V. Phan

Purpose: To compare pain assessment documentation postopioid administration in hospitalized patients before and after implementing nurse education. Methods: Patients 18 years and older were randomly selected for inclusion if they received 1 opioid dose while admitted to the hospital. Through retrospective chart review, opioid data, including date and time, were collected for each opioid administered. Pain score data, including time and date of documentation, were recorded for analysis. The primary objective of this study was to determine whether a nursing education intervention would improve documentation of pain scores within an appropriate time frame postadministration of an opioid medication. The intervention was a training presentation uploaded to the institution’s intranet with an assessment. The primary outcome was measured by comparing the frequency by which nurses documented pain scores following opioid administration before and after education. Results: Three hundred twenty patients (160 patients per time period) were evaluated. The percentage of pain scores recorded within the appropriate assessment time following opioid administration increased from 32.9% to 37.8% ( P = .003). The proportion of appropriate pain score documentation increased 4.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6%-8.2%). Conclusion: An increase in the documentation of efficacy assessments after opioid administration was demonstrated after nursing education. Further studies should be done to identify additional strategies to increase monitoring as well as to identify a benchmark for institutions with regard to pain management monitoring.

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lina S. Fouad ◽  
Paul D. Pettit ◽  
Marcus Threadcraft ◽  
Ali Wells ◽  
Audrey Micallef ◽  
...  

Introduction A retrospective chart review was conducted of visual analog scale (VAS) scores completed before and after trigger point injections (TPIs) for pelvic floor myofascial spasm to evaluate response. Methods Sixty-eight female patients who underwent TPIs from October 9, 2007 to March 12, 2015 were included. The primary end point was the difference between scores. Secondary analyses were conducted for patients who needed repeat TPIs. Descriptive and paired t test analyses were used. Results The key result was an improvement in VAS scores for 65% (44/68) of patients (p<0.0001). The median pre-injection VAS score was 7 (1 to 10), (mean 6.3). The median post-injection VAS score was 4 (0 to 9), (mean 4.3). The median difference between scores in patients who improved was 3 (1 to 8), (mean 3.6). Seventeen of 68 (25%) patients needed repeat TPI, and the median time between injections was 1.5 months (1 to 7 months), (mean 2.2 months). When analyzing pre-injection VAS scores in patients who underwent subsequent repeat injection when compared to patients who did not require repeat injection, there was no difference (p = 0.32). In addition, the differences between pre- and post-injection VAS scores in the patients who underwent repeat injection and those who did not was not significant (p = 0.26). Conclusions We report on 68 women who underwent TPIs, with an improvement in VAS pain scores in 65%. It appears that TPIs for pelvic floor myofascial spasm are successful in reducing pain scores for patients who are refractory to primary therapy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S620-S620
Author(s):  
Kennedy J Freeman ◽  
Kerry O Cleveland ◽  
Christopher M Bland ◽  
Bruce M Jones

Abstract Background VVancomycin and dalbavancin, both in the glycopeptide class of antibiotics, are used in the treatment of Gram-positive infections, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antibiotics in this class contain a heptapeptide core that has potential for cross-sensitivity. Due to this risk, dalbavancin carries a warning in the package insert for use in patients with a glycopeptide allergy. Dalbavancin, a semi-synthetic derivative of vancomycin, has lipophilic side chains which reduce the risk of cross-sensitivity to vancomycin. This case series evaluated patients with a listed vancomycin allergy in their electronic health record who received dalbavancin as an outpatient infusion. Methods This study was a non-randomized, retrospective chart review of adult patients who had a documented vancomycin allergy and received dalbavancin between February 2016 and February 2021 for any indication in the outpatient setting. The primary objective was to evaluate dalbavancin tolerability in patients allergic to vancomycin. Patient characteristics and the specifics of dalbavancin infusion – dose, volume, infusion rate, intravenous line access, and receipt of premedication before infusion – were collected on each patient. Results 559 unique patients received dalbavancin over the time frame. Of these, ten had a documented, subjective vancomycin allergy. Patient-reported allergic reactions were rash (4), hives (3), anaphylaxis (2), red man syndrome (2), renal failure (2), and general malaise (1). Six patients had at least 1 additional subjective drug allergy. The various infections treated included cellulitis/abscess (8), osteomyelitis (1), and bacteremia (2). Most patients received 1500mg (2 received 1125mg) of dalbavancin in 300-500mL of dextrose 5% in water infused at either 600 or 1000mL/hr via a peripheral (6) or central (4) intravenous line. All patients tolerated the infusion with no adverse events reported and no receipt of premedication before administration. Conclusion Dalbavancin may be a reasonable treatment option in vancomycin allergic patients, despite possible cross-sensitivity. Further investigation into cross-sensitivity between vancomycin, dalbavancin, and other glycopeptide class agents is warranted. Disclosures Kerry O. Cleveland, M.D., AbbVie (Speaker’s Bureau)Merck (Speaker’s Bureau)Pfizer (Speaker’s Bureau) Bruce M. Jones, PharmD, BCPS, Abbvie (Consultant, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau)La Jolla (Speaker’s Bureau)Melinta (Consultant)Merck (Consultant)Paratek (Consultant, Speaker’s Bureau)


2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 142-146
Author(s):  
Amanda Suarez ◽  
David C. Knoppert ◽  
David S. C. Lee ◽  
Donna Pletsch ◽  
Jamie A. Seabrook

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVES The primary objective of this study was to compare the use of opioid infusions to that proposed in guidelines published in an in-house medication handbook. Secondary objectives were to assess the documented use of a standardized neonatal pain assessment tool and to describe the supplemental use of opioids concurrent with an opioid infusion. METHODS A retrospective chart review was performed for all patients in the NICU who received opioid infusions between November 1, 2005, and November 30, 2006. Data collected included patient characteristics, opioid infusion dosing and duration, supplemental opioid use, and pain assessment documentation. RESULTS Of the110 neonates who received morphine or fentanyl during the study period, 65 patients met inclusion criteria. Reasons for starting an opioid infusion included nonsurgical sedation and/or analgesia (51%), postoperative pain (17%), and procedural pain (1%). No reason was documented for 31% of patients. Thirtyeight percent of neonates received a loading dose of opioid before initiation of the infusion. The median dose was 100 mcg/kg (IQR=48.2) for morphine and and 1 mcg/kg (IQR=0.8) for fentanyl. The mean ± SD starting rates of morphine and fentanyl infusions were 12.3 ± 4.7 mcg/kg/hr and 1.5 ± 1.7 mcg/kg/hr, respectively. Supplemental opioid doses were given to 46% of neonates during the infusion period. Supplemental doses were given for procedures (69%) and pain/agitation/sedation (26%). No reason was documented for 5% of patients. The Neonatal Pain, Agitation and Sedation Scale scores were only documented 9% of the time for each day that the patient received an opioid infusion. CONCLUSIONS Dosing of opioids generally was within the recommendations that are described in the in-house medication handbook. A substantial percentage of neonates received supplemental opioid doses while on opioid infusions, mostly for procedural pain management. Documentation of the reason for using opioid infusions and the assessment of neonatal pain was poor.


2020 ◽  
Vol 77 (Supplement_4) ◽  
pp. S87-S92
Author(s):  
Gabrielle Hill ◽  
Alisa Hughes-Stricklett

Abstract Purpose Maine Public Law Chapter 488 required that all opioid doses be reduced to below 100 morphine milligram equivalent (MME) by July 1, 2017, and VA Maine Healthcare System implemented policies consistent with the state law. The purpose of this study was to assess self-reported pain scores over 2 years and overall utilization of alternative healthcare services for veterans who were using opioid doses in excess of 100 MME prior to the implementation of policies consistent with Maine PL Chapter 488 in the VA Maine Healthcare System. Methods In this retrospective chart review, veterans were selected for inclusion if they were receiving chronic opioid therapy at the VA Maine Healthcare System of at least 100 MME daily in March 2016 according to the opioid therapy risk report (OTRR). Self-reported pain scores and use of alternative healthcare services were evaluated using VA Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS) data. Results Of the 147 patients evaluated per protocol, 75 patients (51%) did not have a clinically significant change in self-reported pain scores, and the self-reported pain scores of 29 patients (20%) improved from March 2016 to March 2018 (P = 0.054). Conclusion We found that mandatory dose reductions of chronic opioid medications did not result in a clinically or statistically significant worsening of self-reported pain scores. Our study suggests that opioid dose reductions may not negatively impact a patient’s functioning and pain intensity and calls into question the use of long-term opioid therapy for pain given the safety implications.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. e000328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Celina Nahanni ◽  
Ashlie Nadler ◽  
Avery B Nathens

BackgroundOpioid administration in postoperative patients has contributed to the opioid crisis by increasing the load of opioids available in the community. Implementation of evidence-based practices is key to optimizing the use of opioids for acute pain control. This study aims to characterize the administration and prescribing practices after emergency laparoscopic general surgery procedures with the goal of identifying areas for improvement.MethodsA retrospective chart review of 200 patients undergoing emergency laparoscopic appendectomies and cholecystectomies was conducted for a 2-year period at a single institution. Eligible patients were opioid-naïve adults admitted through the emergency department. Opioid administration and discharge prescriptions were converted to oral morphine equivalents (OME), and analyzed and compared with published literature and local guidelines.ResultsOpioid analgesia was provided as needed to 69% of patients in hospital with average dosing of 26.7 OME/day; comparatively, 99.5% of patients received prescriptions for opioids on discharge at an average dosing of 61.7 OME/day. The average dosing in the discharge prescriptions was not correlated with in-hospital needs (Pearson=−0.04; p=0.56); and higher narcotic doses were associated with combination opioid prescriptions compared with separate opioid prescriptions (73.8 (1.90) vs. 50.1 (1.90) OME/day; p<0.01). This difference was driven by the combination medication, Percocet.ConclusionsIn the immediate postoperative period, most patients were managed in hospital with opioid analgesia dosages that fell within guidelines. Nearly all patients were provided with prescriptions for opioids on discharge, these prescriptions both exceeded local guidelines and were not correlated with in-hospital narcotic needs or pain scores.Level of evidenceLevel 3 retrospective cohort study.


2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-156
Author(s):  
Dijana Poljak ◽  
Joseph Chappelle

AbstractObjectiveThe primary objective was to evaluate if the administration of ibuprofen and acetaminophen at regularly scheduled intervals impacts pain scores and total opioid consumption, when compared to administration based on patient demand.MethodsA retrospective chart review was performed comparing scheduled vs. as-needed acetaminophen and ibuprofen regimens, with 100 women included in each arm. Demographics and delivery characteristics were collected in addition to pain scores and total ibuprofen, acetaminophen and oxycodone use at 24, 48 and 72 h postoperatively.ResultsThe scheduled dosing group was found to have a statistically significant decrease in pain scores at all time intervals. Acetaminophen and ibuprofen usage were also noted to be higher in this group while narcotic use was reduced by 64%.ConclusionScheduled dosing of non-narcotic pain medications can substantially decrease opioid usage after cesarean delivery and improve post-operative pain.


Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 2111-2111
Author(s):  
Melissa D Mathias ◽  
Song Zhang ◽  
Haley Hodgkiss ◽  
Timothy McCavit

Abstract Abstract 2111 Background: The acute painful crisis is the clinical hallmark of sickle cell disease (SCD). Recently, time-to-opioid administration (TTO) has been suggested as quality-of-care (QOC) measure for SCD patients with an acute painful crisis (Wang,Pediatrics,128:484,2011). We sought to determine whether TTO was associated with outcomes of emergency department (ED) visits for acute painful crisis. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of ED visits for acute painful crisis to Children's Medical Center Dallas between 1/1/2008 and 12/31/2010. Potential subjects were identified by query of hospital administrative records using all ICD-9CM codes for SCD (282.41, 282.42, and 282.6x) as either the primary or a secondary diagnosis. We included patients with any SCD genotype between 5 and 18 years of age. Records of all potential subjects were reviewed to determine whether the episode represented an acute painful crisis, defined as the recent onset of acute pain not explained by other mechanisms. We excluded patients with confounding sources of pain (e.g., headache and gallstones), patients transferred from other medical centers, and patients who had a surgical procedure within 2 weeks of presentation. We also excluded patients who received a simple transfusion in the preceding 30 days or were part of a chronic transfusion program in the preceding 6 months. The primary predictor variable was TTO in minutes, analyzed continuously and in quartiles. The primary outcome variable was hospital admission with secondary outcomes of change in pain scores 1 & 2, area under the curve (AUC) for pain scores at 4 hours (pain score AUC), and length of stay in the ED (ED LOS) in minutes. Univariate mixed regression (logistic for admission, linear for other outcome variables), including patient random effects, was used to test for association between TTO and other relevant covariates with the outcome variables. Variables with P-values <0.10 in the univariate regression models were subsequently evaluated in multivariate mixed models. Results: From 2,866 ED visits in 2008–2010, 177 subjects were identified with 416 presentations for acute painful crisis treated with IV opioids. 47% of subjects were female and 65% had HbSS/HbSβ0. The primary outcome, inpatient admission, occurred in 53% of ED visits. The median TTO was 86 minutes (intraquartile range (IQR) 54 – 130 minutes) and was not different between those admitted and not admitted to the hospital (not admitted - 86.5 minutes, (IQR 56.5, 126.5); admitted - 85.5 minutes, (IQR 50.5, 130)). TTO (both as a continuous and categorical variable) was not associated with inpatient admission in either univariate or multivariate analyses. In multivariate analyses with secondary outcomes, TTO was associated with change in pain scores 1 & 2, pain score AUC at 4 hours, and ED LOS. After adjusting for age and initial pain score, decreased TTO was independently associated with a decrease in pain scores 1 & 2 (referent - TTO Quartile 4 (>131 minutes) vs Quartile1 (<56 minutes), β coefficient = 0.49, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) [0.08, 0.89], p=0.019). After adjusting for age, decreased TTO was independently associated with a decreased pain score AUC (referent - TTO Quartile 4 vs Quartile 1, β coefficient = −81, 95% CI [−153, −9], p=0.027). Finally, after adjusting for admission status, decreased TTO was independently associated with decreased ED LOS (referent – TTO Quartile 4 vs Quartile 1, β coefficient = −131, 95% CI [−191, −72], p=<0.001). Conclusions: For acute painful crisis, TTO in the ED setting has been suggested as a QOC measure. While TTO is not associated with our primary outcome, inpatient admission, it is independently associated three other important outcomes: change in pain scores 1 & 2, pain score AUC, and ED LOS. The association of the process measure, TTO, with these outcomes increases the appeal for its use in broader sickle cell populations and should lead to necessary steps to reduce TTO in the ED setting. Subsequent studies should investigate TTO in other SCD populations including adults, examine determinants of prolonged TTO, and study interventions designed to reduce TTO in various ED settings. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 86-86
Author(s):  
Aaron Ciner ◽  
Jacqueline Norrell ◽  
Renee Kurz ◽  
Ann W. Silk

86 Background: Pain is a common symptom among patients with cancer and impacts performance status and quality of life. The OCM was implemented at Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey (RCINJ) in July 2016 with the goal of improving many quality metrics in cancer care including documentation of pain and a plan of care for pain. Hypothesis: Documentation of pain and a plan of care for pain improved after implementation of the OCM at RCINJ. Improved documentation would correlate with a decrease in reported quantitative pain scores. Methods: Data from patients enrolled in OCM during its first year of implementation (post OCM) was compared to data from a control cohort the preceding year (pre OCM). The initial progress note and EMR flowsheet in each year were reviewed to determine pain documentation. For patients reporting a pain score ≥ 1 on a 0-10 scale, the association between documentation of a plan of care and improvement in quantitative pain score on a subsequent visit was analyzed using Chi square testing. Results: A total of 260 patient charts were analyzed. A quantitative pain score was documented in 99% of patients in the pre OCM group and 100% in the post OCM group. For those with a pain score ≥ 1, documentation of a plan of care increased from 43% to 55% after OCM implementation. Patients whose charts contained documented plans of care for pain were less likely to have decreased pain scores at a subsequent visit (51% vs 76%). Conclusions: (1) Documentation of a quantitative pain score was completed in nearly all patients before and after the implementation of OCM. (2) There was a non-statistically significant increase in documentation of plan of care for pain after OCM implementation. (3) Documentation of a plan of care was not associated with a decreased pain score at a subsequent visit. This may be the result of small sample size or related to progressive cancer-related pain or inadequate pain intervention. [Table: see text]


2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 501-508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah J. Rhodes ◽  
Rachel C. Koshy ◽  
William C. Waterfield ◽  
Albert W. Wu ◽  
Stuart A. Grossman

PURPOSE: Although physicians view failure to assess pain systematically as the most important barrier to outpatient cancer pain management, little is known about pain assessment in this setting. We sought to determine whether pain is routinely assessed and whether routine quantitative pain assessment is feasible in a busy outpatient oncology practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a pre- and postintervention chart review of 520 randomly selected medical and radiation oncology patient visits at a community hospital-based private outpatient practice. The intervention consisted of training health assistants (HAs) to measure and document patient pain scores by using a visual analog scale. The main outcome measures included HA documentation of patient pain scores, quantitative and qualitative mention of pain in the physician note, and analgesic treatment before and after the intervention. RESULTS: After the intervention, HA documentation of pain scores increased from 1% to 75.6% (P < .0001). Physician documentation increased from 0% to 4.8% for quantitative documentation (P < .01), and from 60.0% to 68.3% for qualitative documentation (not significant). Of all the patients, 23.1% reported significant pain. Subgroups with greater pain included patients actively receiving radiation treatments and patients with lung cancer. Of patients with signifi-cant pain, 28.2% had no mention of pain in the physician note and 47.9% had no documented analgesic treatment. CONCLUSION: Quantitative pain assessment was virtually absent before our intervention but easily implemented and sustained in a busy outpatient oncology practice. Pain score collection identified a high prevalence of pain, patient subgroups at risk for pain, and a significant proportion of patients with pain that was neither evaluated nor treated by their oncologists.


2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Armstrong ◽  
Pauline Wilkinson ◽  
Noleen K McCorry

ObjectivesTo characterise the use of the parenteral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug parecoxib when given by continuous subcutaneous infusion (CSCI) in a hospice population. Clinical experience suggests parecoxib CSCI may be of benefit in this population, but empirical evidence in relation to its safety and efficacy is lacking.MethodsRetrospective chart review of patients with a cancer diagnosis receiving parecoxib CSCI from 2008 to 2013 at the Marie Curie Hospice, Belfast. Data were collected on treatment regime, tolerability and, in patients receiving at least 7 days treatment, baseline opioid dose and changes in pain scores or opioid rescue medication requirements.ResultsParecoxib CSCI was initiated in 80 patients with a mean administration of 17.9 days (median 11, range 1–94). When used for a period of 7 days, there was a statistically significant reduction in pain scores (p=0.002) and in the number of rescue opioid doses required (p=0.001), but no statistically significant opioid-sparing effect (p=0.222). It was generally well tolerated, although gastrointestinal, renal adverse effects and local site irritation were reported.ConclusionsParecoxib may have a valuable place in the management of cancer pain, especially towards the end of life when oral administration is no longer possible and CSCI administration is relied on. Further studies into the efficacy and tolerability of parecoxib CSCI are merited.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document