4.2 Article

Pilot Testing the Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment (CAPA) Measure

期刊

PAIN MANAGEMENT NURSING
卷 20, 期 5, 页码 462-467

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.pmn.2019.02.005

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Pain is one of the most common symptoms experienced by patients in acute care hospitals and acutely ill patients experience both acute and chronic pain. Unrelieved pain can have a profound negative impact on individuals' functional status, well-being, quality of life, and satisfaction with care. For providers, managing pain can be challenging. While the numeric rating scale is widely accepted and used, it measures only pain intensity. CAPA (R) pain assessment offers an alternative approach in which providers have a conversation with patients about pain and how it impacts five key areas. Aims: The purpose of this pilot project was to evaluate provider and patient satisfaction with the CAPA (R) measure as compared to a numeric rating scale when evaluating patients' experience with pain. Design: A mixed methods qualitative design was employed. Setting: This study was conducted at a 247-bed community teaching hospital in Providence, RI. Participants: The target sample included patients admitted to the study units and providers who delivered care to patients on the study units and used the numeric rating scale and the CAPA (R) method of assessment. Methods: In focus groups, nurses and physicians were asked about satisfaction with evaluating patients' pain with the numeric rating scale as compared to CAPA (R). During a one-to-one interview, patients were asked to describe their impressions of the two assessment measures. Results: Nurses, physicians, and patients were satisfied that CAPA (R) effectively evaluated pain and provided more information about pain than the numeric rating scale. Conclusions: CAPA (R) is recommended as a supporting assessment to evaluate patients' pain experience in acute care. (c) 2019 American Society for Pain Management Nursing. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据