患者和提供者对手工真空抽吸过程中疼痛管理的看法。

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH African journal of reproductive health Pub Date : 2024-12-31 DOI:10.29063/ajrh2024/v28i12.2
Stephen Gwer, Karlheinz Samenjo, Robert C Bailey, Javan Imbamba, Stella Odeny, Erin Koksal, Jan-Carel Diehl, Aparna Ramanathan
{"title":"患者和提供者对手工真空抽吸过程中疼痛管理的看法。","authors":"Stephen Gwer, Karlheinz Samenjo, Robert C Bailey, Javan Imbamba, Stella Odeny, Erin Koksal, Jan-Carel Diehl, Aparna Ramanathan","doi":"10.29063/ajrh2024/v28i12.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) is a painful procedure often conducted without analgesia. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a paracervical block (PCB) as the mode of pain relief during MVA. Few studies have assessed patient perspectives on pain control during MVA. We investigated the perspectives of health workers and patients on MVA under PCB. This study was nested within a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the Chloe SED (syringe extension device) for PCB provision. Eleven providers and 61 patients were enrolled. All providers had MVA experience. They had not provided pain relief on 20% of occasions, and only one had previously administered PCB for MVA. Both patients and providers indicated MVA was painful and deserving of analgesia. Pain was the most common reason for difficulty completing an MVA. Providers noted that PCB made the procedure more tolerable. For patients, efficacy, remaining conscious, and same-day discharge were key considerations when selecting pain relief. Notably, 84% of patients expressed satisfaction with MVA under PCB. PCB is a vital component of the MVA care package. Considering patient and provider perspectives is essential to optimizing a humane and effective procedural experience.</p>","PeriodicalId":7551,"journal":{"name":"African journal of reproductive health","volume":"28 12","pages":"21-28"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient and provider perspectives on pain management during manual vacuum aspiration.\",\"authors\":\"Stephen Gwer, Karlheinz Samenjo, Robert C Bailey, Javan Imbamba, Stella Odeny, Erin Koksal, Jan-Carel Diehl, Aparna Ramanathan\",\"doi\":\"10.29063/ajrh2024/v28i12.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) is a painful procedure often conducted without analgesia. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a paracervical block (PCB) as the mode of pain relief during MVA. Few studies have assessed patient perspectives on pain control during MVA. We investigated the perspectives of health workers and patients on MVA under PCB. This study was nested within a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the Chloe SED (syringe extension device) for PCB provision. Eleven providers and 61 patients were enrolled. All providers had MVA experience. They had not provided pain relief on 20% of occasions, and only one had previously administered PCB for MVA. Both patients and providers indicated MVA was painful and deserving of analgesia. Pain was the most common reason for difficulty completing an MVA. Providers noted that PCB made the procedure more tolerable. For patients, efficacy, remaining conscious, and same-day discharge were key considerations when selecting pain relief. Notably, 84% of patients expressed satisfaction with MVA under PCB. PCB is a vital component of the MVA care package. Considering patient and provider perspectives is essential to optimizing a humane and effective procedural experience.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7551,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"African journal of reproductive health\",\"volume\":\"28 12\",\"pages\":\"21-28\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"African journal of reproductive health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29063/ajrh2024/v28i12.2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African journal of reproductive health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29063/ajrh2024/v28i12.2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

手动真空抽吸(MVA)是一个痛苦的过程,通常进行无镇痛。世界卫生组织(WHO)推荐宫颈旁阻滞(PCB)作为MVA期间疼痛缓解的模式。很少有研究评估患者对MVA期间疼痛控制的看法。我们调查了卫生工作者和患者对多氯联苯下MVA的看法。本研究嵌套在一项试点随机对照试验(RCT)中,评估Chloe SED(注射器延伸装置)提供多氯联苯。11名提供者和61名患者入组。所有供应商都有MVA经验。在20%的情况下,他们没有提供疼痛缓解,只有一个人以前使用过PCB治疗MVA。患者和提供者均表示MVA是痛苦的,值得镇痛。疼痛是难以完成MVA的最常见原因。提供者注意到PCB使这个过程更容易忍受。对患者而言,在选择止痛方案时,疗效、保持意识和当日出院是关键考虑因素。值得注意的是,84%的患者对PCB下的MVA表示满意。PCB是MVA护理包的重要组成部分。考虑患者和提供者的观点对于优化人性化和有效的程序体验至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Patient and provider perspectives on pain management during manual vacuum aspiration.

Manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) is a painful procedure often conducted without analgesia. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a paracervical block (PCB) as the mode of pain relief during MVA. Few studies have assessed patient perspectives on pain control during MVA. We investigated the perspectives of health workers and patients on MVA under PCB. This study was nested within a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the Chloe SED (syringe extension device) for PCB provision. Eleven providers and 61 patients were enrolled. All providers had MVA experience. They had not provided pain relief on 20% of occasions, and only one had previously administered PCB for MVA. Both patients and providers indicated MVA was painful and deserving of analgesia. Pain was the most common reason for difficulty completing an MVA. Providers noted that PCB made the procedure more tolerable. For patients, efficacy, remaining conscious, and same-day discharge were key considerations when selecting pain relief. Notably, 84% of patients expressed satisfaction with MVA under PCB. PCB is a vital component of the MVA care package. Considering patient and provider perspectives is essential to optimizing a humane and effective procedural experience.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
African journal of reproductive health
African journal of reproductive health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The African Journal of Reproductive Health is a multidisciplinary and international journal that publishes original research, comprehensive review articles, short reports, and commentaries on reproductive heath in Africa. The journal strives to provide a forum for African authors, as well as others working in Africa, to share findings on all aspects of reproductive health, and to disseminate innovative, relevant and useful information on reproductive health throughout the continent.
期刊最新文献
Effectiveness of open glottis during second stage of labor on maternal and neonatal outcome among primigravid women- A quasi-experimental study. Two decades of women's sexual and reproductive health and rights in Nigeria: Successes, challenges, and opportunities. Where are the "rights" in SRHR? Evaluation of midwives' knowledge, attitudes, and opinions about LGBTI Individuals. Factors influencing access and utilization of sexual and reproductive health services by adolescents in Namibia: Insights from nurses.
×
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:481959085
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