ArticleJournal of pain research2013
Anatomy of the Pain Centre waiting list at the Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM).
Article in Journal of pain research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Project ECHO Telementoring Intervention for Managing Chronic Pain in Primary Care: Insights from a Qualitative Study.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWaiting list management at chronic pain clinics has become a serious problem throughout Canada. We analyzed the waiting list at the Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM) Pain Centre.
methodsThe present study is an observational, prospective study. We used a specifically designed survey questionnaire. Survey findings were analyzed with descriptive statistical methods.
resultsA total of 270 patients were contacted; only 146 were included. Of these, 93 were women and 53 men. The average age was 55.9 years. Fifty-two percent of the patients were referred by a medical specialist; 34% by family physicians; 3% for emergency; and 11% unknown. The mean for pain score was 6.7/10. Seventy-three percent were taking pain killers with an average improvement on their pain score of 52%. Ten percent of respondents were not taking any type of analgesic medication, while 17% were taking over-the-counter drugs. Fifty-three percent of the patients had been suffering from chronic pain for 5 years or less, while 10% had been suffering and awaiting specialized pain treatment for more than 20 years.
conclusionOur data suggests that accessibility to specialized health care is not the sole obstacle to the timely and effective management of chronic pain. Seventy-three percent of the patients were taking some form of pharmaceutical treatment for pain and reported an average improvement rate of 52% on their pain score under medication. Such inconsistency may be attributable to patients' lack of compliance with their treatment. The World Health Organization Working Group recommended in chronic patients a novel approach to health care, based on patient therapeutic education. Our results show that patients need to acquire self-management skills regarding their chronic conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.