Effectiveness of implementing a Best Practice Guideline recommendations to manage pain in oncological hospitalized patients

Ana-Isabel Alcañiz-Mesas , María-Victoria Ruiz-García , María-Pilar Córcoles-Jiménez , María-José Caballero-García , María Teresa González Álvarez
{"title":"Effectiveness of implementing a Best Practice Guideline recommendations to manage pain in oncological hospitalized patients","authors":"Ana-Isabel Alcañiz-Mesas ,&nbsp;María-Victoria Ruiz-García ,&nbsp;María-Pilar Córcoles-Jiménez ,&nbsp;María-José Caballero-García ,&nbsp;María Teresa González Álvarez","doi":"10.1016/j.enfcle.2024.11.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To evaluate the effectiveness of implementing the Clinical Best Practice Guideline (BPG) “Assessment and Management of Pain” recommendations for pain control in oncological/oncohaematological hospitalized patients.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Ambispective cohort study. Sample and Setting: Adults admitted to oncological unit in Hospital of Albacete.</div></div><div><h3>Intervention</h3><div>Implementation of GBP recommendations. Variables: 1) Demographic data. 2)On implementation of GBP recommendations. 3) Outcome in patients: pain intensity in the first 24 h after admission and maximum intensity during admission Tools: Numeric and Visual Scales. Data collection: indicators exported from clinical history for evaluation of the BPSO® program. Ethical aspects: anonymous data. Data analysis (SPSS®): Descriptive during periods: baseline (T0 = December 2015); initial (T1 = 2017); consolidation (T2 = 2018–2019); sustainability (T3 = 2021–2022). Measurements of central tendency and dispersion, absolute and relative frequencies. Comparison of proportions (Chi-Square) and averages (Student t-test, ANOVA). Statistical significance: p &lt; 0.05.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Included 572 patients, 61.5% (352) men. Daily intervention of pain detection was performed in 94.6% (538) of patients (20%–T0; 98.3%–T1; 98.4%–T2; 91.2%–T3; p &lt; 0.001), pain assessment using an appropriate scale in 97.6% (558) (0%–T0; 98.3%–T1; 99.2%–T2; 100%–T3; p &lt; 0.001); 93.7% (535) had a care plan for assessment and management of pain (0%–T0; 98.3%–T1; 96.3%–T2; 92.3%–T3; p &lt; 0.001). The percentage of patients who had severe pain (6–10) during the first 24 hours was reduced from T1 to T3 (5.1%–T1; 6.6%–T2; 2.1%–T3; p = 0.145), but throughout hospitalization increased from T1 to T3 (19.2%–T1; 17%–T2; 22.5%–T3; p = 0.21).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Implementation of recommendations has led to a statistically significant improvement over the periods in the study; however, no effectiveness has been shown to reduce pain intensity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":72917,"journal":{"name":"Enfermeria clinica (English Edition)","volume":"34 6","pages":"Pages 448-457"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Enfermeria clinica (English Edition)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2445147924000924","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of implementing the Clinical Best Practice Guideline (BPG) “Assessment and Management of Pain” recommendations for pain control in oncological/oncohaematological hospitalized patients.

Methods

Ambispective cohort study. Sample and Setting: Adults admitted to oncological unit in Hospital of Albacete.

Intervention

Implementation of GBP recommendations. Variables: 1) Demographic data. 2)On implementation of GBP recommendations. 3) Outcome in patients: pain intensity in the first 24 h after admission and maximum intensity during admission Tools: Numeric and Visual Scales. Data collection: indicators exported from clinical history for evaluation of the BPSO® program. Ethical aspects: anonymous data. Data analysis (SPSS®): Descriptive during periods: baseline (T0 = December 2015); initial (T1 = 2017); consolidation (T2 = 2018–2019); sustainability (T3 = 2021–2022). Measurements of central tendency and dispersion, absolute and relative frequencies. Comparison of proportions (Chi-Square) and averages (Student t-test, ANOVA). Statistical significance: p < 0.05.

Results

Included 572 patients, 61.5% (352) men. Daily intervention of pain detection was performed in 94.6% (538) of patients (20%–T0; 98.3%–T1; 98.4%–T2; 91.2%–T3; p < 0.001), pain assessment using an appropriate scale in 97.6% (558) (0%–T0; 98.3%–T1; 99.2%–T2; 100%–T3; p < 0.001); 93.7% (535) had a care plan for assessment and management of pain (0%–T0; 98.3%–T1; 96.3%–T2; 92.3%–T3; p < 0.001). The percentage of patients who had severe pain (6–10) during the first 24 hours was reduced from T1 to T3 (5.1%–T1; 6.6%–T2; 2.1%–T3; p = 0.145), but throughout hospitalization increased from T1 to T3 (19.2%–T1; 17%–T2; 22.5%–T3; p = 0.21).

Conclusions

Implementation of recommendations has led to a statistically significant improvement over the periods in the study; however, no effectiveness has been shown to reduce pain intensity.
实施《最佳实践指南》建议以控制肿瘤住院患者疼痛的效果。
目的评估《临床最佳实践指南》(BPG)"疼痛的评估和管理 "建议对肿瘤/血液病住院患者疼痛控制的实施效果:方法:前瞻性队列研究:干预措施:实施 GBP 建议:变量:1)人口统计学数据。2)GBP建议的实施情况。3)患者的结果:入院后 24 小时内的疼痛强度和入院期间的最大疼痛强度:数据收集:从临床病历中导出指标,用于评估 BPSO® 程序。伦理方面:匿名数据。数据分析(SPSS®):描述性期间:基线(T0 = 2015 年 12 月);初始(T1 = 2017 年);巩固(T2 = 2018-2019 年);持续(T3 = 2021-2022 年)。中心倾向和离散度、绝对频率和相对频率的测量。比例(Chi-Square)和平均数(学生 t 检验、方差分析)的比较。统计学意义:P 结果:共纳入 572 名患者,61.5%(352 名)为男性。94.6%(538 人)的患者进行了疼痛检测的日常干预(20%-T0;98.3%-T1;98.4%-T2;91.2%-T3;P 结论:在研究期间,建议的实施带来了统计学意义上的显著改善;然而,并没有显示出降低疼痛强度的效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信