癌症患者的疼痛评估与管理

Mariam Dabbous, Fouad Sakr, E. Bouraad, J. Safwan, M. Akel, M. Cherfan
{"title":"癌症患者的疼痛评估与管理","authors":"Mariam Dabbous, Fouad Sakr, E. Bouraad, J. Safwan, M. Akel, M. Cherfan","doi":"10.4103/2394-2010.199324","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Pain is one of the most common associated symptoms in cancer patients. It develops a number of devastating physical and psychological symptoms. Aim: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the current pain assessment and management plans in cancer patients. Settings and Design: This prospective multicenter observational study was carried out in 3 university hospitals in Lebanon over 6 months from October 2014 to April 2015. Materials and Methods: Men and women aged 18 years and above were observed if they have had any type of cancer, more than 1 day of hospitalization, cancer-related pain, and receiving analgesics. A total of 508 patients were screened over 1 year, where 100 patients have met the eligibility criteria and were observed. The primary outcome measure was an evaluation of pain assessment adherence to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. Secondary outcomes included evaluation of adherence of pain management approaches. Statistical Analysis Used: Data were analyzed with SPSS version 21.0. Adherence to the guideline recommendations for assessment was compared using t-test, whereas, adherence to guideline recommendations for treatment was compared using linear regression. Results and Conclusions: Most patients were not adhered to the pain assessment guidelines (82% vs. 18%, P = 0.002), where although patients were assessed by a health-care provider during initial hospitalization, yet, no tool was used for assessment, and there was no documentation of measured pain intensity. For the pain management adherence, 76% were adhered versus 24% were not adhered, P = 0.006. The mis-adherence was in the choice of opioid agent (61.8% vs. 38.2%, P = 0.003), and dosing of these agents (75.5% vs. 24.5%, P< 0.001). Well adherence was observed in terms of nonopioid analgesics use (72.5% were adhered vs. 27.5% were not, P = 0.01). Poor overall adherence to NCCN guidelines was found, and the gaps were related to pain assessment and management recommendations.","PeriodicalId":16068,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Research and Reviews","volume":"17 1","pages":"8 - 12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pain assessment and management in cancer patients\",\"authors\":\"Mariam Dabbous, Fouad Sakr, E. Bouraad, J. Safwan, M. Akel, M. Cherfan\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/2394-2010.199324\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Pain is one of the most common associated symptoms in cancer patients. It develops a number of devastating physical and psychological symptoms. Aim: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the current pain assessment and management plans in cancer patients. Settings and Design: This prospective multicenter observational study was carried out in 3 university hospitals in Lebanon over 6 months from October 2014 to April 2015. Materials and Methods: Men and women aged 18 years and above were observed if they have had any type of cancer, more than 1 day of hospitalization, cancer-related pain, and receiving analgesics. A total of 508 patients were screened over 1 year, where 100 patients have met the eligibility criteria and were observed. The primary outcome measure was an evaluation of pain assessment adherence to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. Secondary outcomes included evaluation of adherence of pain management approaches. Statistical Analysis Used: Data were analyzed with SPSS version 21.0. Adherence to the guideline recommendations for assessment was compared using t-test, whereas, adherence to guideline recommendations for treatment was compared using linear regression. Results and Conclusions: Most patients were not adhered to the pain assessment guidelines (82% vs. 18%, P = 0.002), where although patients were assessed by a health-care provider during initial hospitalization, yet, no tool was used for assessment, and there was no documentation of measured pain intensity. For the pain management adherence, 76% were adhered versus 24% were not adhered, P = 0.006. The mis-adherence was in the choice of opioid agent (61.8% vs. 38.2%, P = 0.003), and dosing of these agents (75.5% vs. 24.5%, P< 0.001). Well adherence was observed in terms of nonopioid analgesics use (72.5% were adhered vs. 27.5% were not, P = 0.01). Poor overall adherence to NCCN guidelines was found, and the gaps were related to pain assessment and management recommendations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":16068,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health Research and Reviews\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"8 - 12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health Research and Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/2394-2010.199324\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Research and Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/2394-2010.199324","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

背景:疼痛是癌症患者最常见的相关症状之一。它会产生一系列毁灭性的生理和心理症状。目的:本研究的目的是评估目前癌症患者的疼痛评估和管理方案。背景和设计:本前瞻性多中心观察性研究于2014年10月至2015年4月在黎巴嫩的3所大学医院进行,为期6个月。材料和方法:观察年龄在18岁及以上的男性和女性是否患有任何类型的癌症,住院时间超过1天,是否有癌症相关的疼痛,是否接受过止痛药。1年内共筛查508例患者,其中100例患者符合入选标准并进行观察。主要结局指标是疼痛评估是否符合国家综合癌症网络(NCCN)指南。次要结局包括评估疼痛管理方法的依从性。使用:数据分析采用SPSS 21.0版本。使用t检验比较对评估指南建议的依从性,而使用线性回归比较对治疗指南建议的依从性。结果和结论:大多数患者没有遵守疼痛评估指南(82%对18%,P = 0.002),尽管患者在最初住院期间由卫生保健提供者进行了评估,但没有使用任何工具进行评估,也没有测量疼痛强度的记录。在疼痛管理依从性方面,76%的患者坚持治疗,24%的患者不坚持治疗,P = 0.006。阿片类药物的选择(61.8%比38.2%,P = 0.003)和阿片类药物的剂量(75.5%比24.5%,P< 0.001)是不符合的。在非阿片类镇痛药的使用方面,依从性良好(72.5%对27.5%,P = 0.01)。对NCCN指南的总体依从性较差,差距与疼痛评估和管理建议有关。
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
Pain assessment and management in cancer patients
Background: Pain is one of the most common associated symptoms in cancer patients. It develops a number of devastating physical and psychological symptoms. Aim: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the current pain assessment and management plans in cancer patients. Settings and Design: This prospective multicenter observational study was carried out in 3 university hospitals in Lebanon over 6 months from October 2014 to April 2015. Materials and Methods: Men and women aged 18 years and above were observed if they have had any type of cancer, more than 1 day of hospitalization, cancer-related pain, and receiving analgesics. A total of 508 patients were screened over 1 year, where 100 patients have met the eligibility criteria and were observed. The primary outcome measure was an evaluation of pain assessment adherence to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. Secondary outcomes included evaluation of adherence of pain management approaches. Statistical Analysis Used: Data were analyzed with SPSS version 21.0. Adherence to the guideline recommendations for assessment was compared using t-test, whereas, adherence to guideline recommendations for treatment was compared using linear regression. Results and Conclusions: Most patients were not adhered to the pain assessment guidelines (82% vs. 18%, P = 0.002), where although patients were assessed by a health-care provider during initial hospitalization, yet, no tool was used for assessment, and there was no documentation of measured pain intensity. For the pain management adherence, 76% were adhered versus 24% were not adhered, P = 0.006. The mis-adherence was in the choice of opioid agent (61.8% vs. 38.2%, P = 0.003), and dosing of these agents (75.5% vs. 24.5%, P< 0.001). Well adherence was observed in terms of nonopioid analgesics use (72.5% were adhered vs. 27.5% were not, P = 0.01). Poor overall adherence to NCCN guidelines was found, and the gaps were related to pain assessment and management recommendations.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Outcomes of patients with end-stage kidney disease hospitalized with COVID-19: A single-center experience from Eastern India Biological plausibility of spirituality in public health The pH and titration values of commonly used beverages in Trinidad: A cross-sectional study A role of community nurses and challenges faced by them toward providing MCH services in selected blocks in West Bengal: A cross-sectional study Lifestyle changes during the Covid-19 lockdown among young adults in Kerala in terms of physical activity, sleeping habits, and perceived psychological problems: A cross-sectional study
×
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