Exploring Internurse Variation in Documentation of the Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment (CAPA) Tool

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING Pain Management Nursing Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-18 DOI:10.1016/j.pmn.2025.01.015
Sandra Hagstrom PhD, RN, APRN, CPNP-PC , Susan O'Conner-Von PhD, PMGT-BC, CNE, FNAP , Michelle A. Mathiason MS , Mary Fran Tracy PhD, RN, APRN, CNS, FCNS, FAAN
{"title":"Exploring Internurse Variation in Documentation of the Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment (CAPA) Tool","authors":"Sandra Hagstrom PhD, RN, APRN, CPNP-PC ,&nbsp;Susan O'Conner-Von PhD, PMGT-BC, CNE, FNAP ,&nbsp;Michelle A. Mathiason MS ,&nbsp;Mary Fran Tracy PhD, RN, APRN, CNS, FCNS, FAAN","doi":"10.1016/j.pmn.2025.01.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>The Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment (CAPA) tool was developed to facilitate dialogue between clinicians and patients regarding pain, providing more comprehensive information than intensity ratings. However, inconsistency in its administration and documentation may limit its utility. The purpose of this study was to describe variation in nurses’ CAPA documentation.</div></div><div><h3>Design and methods</h3><div>In this descriptive study, electronic health record data documented by 103 registered nurses caring for 1,123 patients hospitalized on an adult medical unit and intermediate care unit were analyzed. Data from a small sample (n = 10) were analyzed initially to refine the research questions. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to compare documentation patterns between units and individual nurses.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Both low and high documentation frequency were observed: frequency of charting all five CAPA domains ranged from 0%-100% when analyzed by nurse; frequency and timing of each domain's documentation varied widely. Inconsistent use of the tool also included CAPA documentation in sleeping patients and variability in options most frequently selected by individual nurses within each domain.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>While significant differences were found between units, comparison of individual nurses within each unit showed similar variability. This suggests that the differences cannot be explained by unit-specific norms, orientation, staffing ratios, or patient characteristics but likely reflects the CAPA tool's inherent ambiguity.</div></div><div><h3>Clinical Implications</h3><div>Inconsistencies in individual nurses’ use of the CAPA limit the ability to trend pain over time and monitor effectiveness of the treatment plan, compromising the tool's intended benefit of providing a more comprehensive picture of each patient's pain.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":19959,"journal":{"name":"Pain Management Nursing","volume":"26 4","pages":"Pages 416-423"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Management Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S152490422500030X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

The Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment (CAPA) tool was developed to facilitate dialogue between clinicians and patients regarding pain, providing more comprehensive information than intensity ratings. However, inconsistency in its administration and documentation may limit its utility. The purpose of this study was to describe variation in nurses’ CAPA documentation.

Design and methods

In this descriptive study, electronic health record data documented by 103 registered nurses caring for 1,123 patients hospitalized on an adult medical unit and intermediate care unit were analyzed. Data from a small sample (n = 10) were analyzed initially to refine the research questions. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to compare documentation patterns between units and individual nurses.

Results

Both low and high documentation frequency were observed: frequency of charting all five CAPA domains ranged from 0%-100% when analyzed by nurse; frequency and timing of each domain's documentation varied widely. Inconsistent use of the tool also included CAPA documentation in sleeping patients and variability in options most frequently selected by individual nurses within each domain.

Conclusions

While significant differences were found between units, comparison of individual nurses within each unit showed similar variability. This suggests that the differences cannot be explained by unit-specific norms, orientation, staffing ratios, or patient characteristics but likely reflects the CAPA tool's inherent ambiguity.

Clinical Implications

Inconsistencies in individual nurses’ use of the CAPA limit the ability to trend pain over time and monitor effectiveness of the treatment plan, compromising the tool's intended benefit of providing a more comprehensive picture of each patient's pain.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探讨临床疼痛评估(CAPA)工具记录中的护士间差异。
目的:临床校准疼痛评估(CAPA)工具的开发是为了促进临床医生和患者之间关于疼痛的对话,提供比强度评级更全面的信息。然而,其管理和文档的不一致性可能会限制其效用。本研究的目的是描述护士的CAPA文件的变化。设计与方法:在这项描述性研究中,对103名注册护士记录的1,123名在成人医疗单位和中级护理单位住院的患者的电子健康记录数据进行分析。从一个小样本(n = 10)的数据进行初步分析,以完善研究问题。使用描述性和推断性统计来比较单位和个别护士之间的文件模式。结果:记录的频率有高有低:护士分析时,所有五个CAPA域的记录频率在0% ~ 100%之间;每个领域文档的频率和时间变化很大。该工具的不一致使用还包括睡眠患者的CAPA文件,以及每个领域内单个护士最常选择的选项的可变性。结论:虽然各单位之间存在显著差异,但各单位内护士个体的比较也显示出相似的可变性。这表明这些差异不能用单位特定规范、定位、人员比例或患者特征来解释,但可能反映了CAPA工具固有的模糊性。临床意义:个别护士使用CAPA的不一致性限制了随时间变化的疼痛趋势和监测治疗计划有效性的能力,损害了该工具提供每个患者更全面的疼痛情况的预期效益。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Pain Management Nursing
Pain Management Nursing 医学-护理
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
187
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: This peer-reviewed journal offers a unique focus on the realm of pain management as it applies to nursing. Original and review articles from experts in the field offer key insights in the areas of clinical practice, advocacy, education, administration, and research. Additional features include practice guidelines and pharmacology updates.
期刊最新文献
To Join or Not to Join: A Nurse's Story of "Why". Evidence Mapping of TCM Nursing Appropriate Technology in Treatment of Cancer Pain. Healthcare Workers' Pain Beliefs and Attitudes Towards Patients with Chronic Pain. Pain-Related Determinants of Frailty in Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures. The Effect of TENS on Patient Outcomes After Total Knee Arthroplasty.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1