4.4 Article

Patient Participation in Quality Pain Management During an Acute Care Admission

Journal

CLINICAL JOURNAL OF PAIN
Volume 30, Issue 4, Pages 316-323

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e318298ddc5

Keywords

quality and safety; acute care; pain management; patient participation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: The objective of the study was to explore patient participation in the context of pain management during a hospital admission for a cardiac surgical intervention of patients with cardiovascular disease. Methods: This is a single-institution study, with a case-study design. The unit of analysis was a cardiothoracic ward of a major metropolitan, tertiary referral hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Multiple methods of data collection were used including preadmission and predischarge patient interviews (n=98), naturalistic observations (n=48), and focus group interviews (n=2). Results: Patients' preference for participation in pain management was not always commensurate with their involvement in pain management. Patients displayed a greater understanding of their role in pain management in terms of reporting pain and the use of multimodal analgesics after surgery. The majority of patients, however, did not understand the importance of reporting pain to avoid complications. Patients had limited opportunity to participate in their pain management. On occasions in which clinicians did involve patients, the involvement appeared to be focused on reporting pain rather than treatment of pain. Discussion: Patient participation in pain management during hospitalization is not optimal. This has implications for the quality of pain management patients receive. Higher engagement of patients in their pain management during hospitalization is required to ensure comfort, reduce potential for complications, and adequately prepare the patients to manage their pain following discharge from hospital.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available