Acute Pain Management: Operative or Medical Procedures and Trauma

1997 ◽  
Vol 31 (9) ◽  
pp. 1068-1076 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheryl L Follin ◽  
Scott L Charland

Objective To review the topics presented in the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) Clinical Practice Guideline for Acute Pain Management and provide updated information on therapeutic issues as necessary. Data Sources AHCPR Clinical Practice Guideline for Acute Pain Management: Operative or Medical Procedures and Trauma. A MEDLINE search (1990 to June 1996) of English-language literature pertaining to pain assessment and management was performed. Reference lists from relevant articles also served as a literature source. Study Selection and Data Extraction All articles identified from the data sources were evaluated. Relevant information, as determined by the authors, was included in the review. Data Synthesis Inadequate acute pain management continues to be recognized as a problem due to limited health professional education on the treatment of pain, inadequate patient empowerment, negative connotations associated with opioid analgesics (e.g., fear of “addiction”), federal regulations associated with prescribing opioid analgesics, and difficulty in assessing pain. The widespread inadequacy in pain management prompted the development of the AHCPR Clinical Practice Guideline for Acute Pain Management, which was published in 1992. In addition to reviewing the pain guideline, this article includes updated information on ketorolac tromethamine, tramadol, local anesthetics, sedation, regional anesthetic techniques, and the management of opioid adverse effects. Conclusions The AHCPR Clinical Practice Guideline for Acute Pain Management is a comprehensive, yet functional, review for clinicians. Most issues relating to acute pain assessment and management are adequately discussed. Overall, this guideline is a worthwhile general resource to clinicians. It is important, however, for clinicians managing acute pain issues to supplement this guideline with more detailed and current information.

2019 ◽  
Vol 185 (5-6) ◽  
pp. e573-e578
Author(s):  
Sandeep T Dhanjal ◽  
Kalyn C Jannace ◽  
Nicholas A Giordano ◽  
Krista B Highland

Abstract Introduction The 2017 Joint Trauma System Clinical Practice Guideline for Pain, Anxiety, and Delirium (JTS CPG) provides an evidence-based framework for managing pain, anxiety, and delirium in combat settings. In this study, we evaluate the use of multimodal analgesia and assess pain outcomes, as indicated by the JTS CPG, at the combat support hospital (CSH). Materials and Methods In this quality improvement project, data were collected for all patients, presenting to the CSH in Baghdad, Iraq, who received consultation from the acute pain service from October 10, 2017 to February 27, 2018. Univariate analyses described patient demographic and clinical characteristics. Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale (DVPRS) scores, physical therapy completion, and sleep duration were recorded for each patient daily. Correlations assessed relationships between variables, including clinical characteristics and DVPRS scores. Results 34 patients were included in this study. About 65% of the patients included in this study were Iraqi military, while the other 35% were U.S. or Coalition Forces. Over half received more than one class of analgesic medication. The majority of patients received regional anesthesia, with 17 different techniques utilized. The DVPRS had acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach alpha = 0.87, 95% CI 0.80, 0.95). There was a significant difference in median DVPRS pain intensity scores between those who met physical therapy goals and those who did not. Sleep duration was negatively correlated with both the DVPRS pain intensity and sleep scores. Conclusions This report indicates that acute pain service teams integrated in a CSH can feasibly implement JTS CPGs using a team-based approach. Given the military’s emphasis on managing complex pain and disability among survivors beginning in the combat environment, it is imperative that innovations and best practices, like the JTS CPG, be assessed in the combat setting.


1997 ◽  
Vol 87 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. 805A
Author(s):  
R.S. Lagasse ◽  
E.M. Kitain ◽  
M. Jakubowski ◽  
K. Ciccone ◽  
J. Jiang ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (12) ◽  
pp. 1089-1098 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernie Garrett ◽  
Tarnia Taverner ◽  
Wendy Masinde ◽  
Diane Gromala ◽  
Chris Shaw ◽  
...  

2005 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. S34-S34
Author(s):  
E DURAND ◽  
C CNRNET ◽  
F FMNERENR ◽  
T ONEILL ◽  
P MERTES ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony V. Schoenwald

Purpose. This report evaluates a beginning Nurse Practitioner (NP) role in Acute Pain Management. Healthcare setting. The role was implemented within an anaesthesiology-based pain service. The NP author developed this pain service in 2002 and was endorsed as an NP 6 years later. The NP reviews all clients undergoing major surgery or trauma and provides pain management to women for caesarean section. Prior to this role, there were significant delays for some patients requiring prompt analgesia. This was because of the decreased availability of anaesthetists to fully participate in the pain service due to the demand for complex anaesthesiology practice. Method of data collection. Data were conveniently collected by the NP on prescription and service provision over 200 working days. Main findings. Therapeutic activity reflected contemporary pain management practice and espouse the NP as a safe and effective clinician. The role has improved patient access to pain management through the prompt use of non-pharmacological interventions, drugs used to treat analgesic side effects, opioids and non-opioid analgesics. Principal conclusions. These initial positive outcomes are consistent with NP role development described elsewhere in Australia and overseas across a variety of healthcare settings. To sustain this role, robust continuing education and clinical support is required. What is known about the topic? There is little published information on the development of the Nurse Practitioner (NP) role in acute pain services in Australia or overseas. The acute pain role is a new development in Australia and so previous descriptions of NP practice have focussed on other specialty areas such as Emergency or Mental Health. What does this paper add? This report demonstrates positive and safe client outcomes as a result of a NP role in acute pain management. More importantly, it may contribute to accumulating evidence that NPs are safe prescribers of opioids and other analgesics in acute settings. What are the implications for practitioners? Novice NPs and Candidates practising in this specialty need to use this information as support for their own role development and implementation in other acute pain services in Australia.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document