ArticlePain research and treatment2014
Pain prevalence and management in an internal medicine setting in Italy.
Article in Pain research and treatment, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electrochemical sensor based on mesoporous g-CScientific reports · 2024Article
- Nurses' pain management practices for admitted patients at the Comprehensive specialized hospitals and its associated factors, a multi-center study.BMC nursing · 2023Article
- Three-year hospital-wide pain management system implementation at a tertiary medical center: Pain prevalence analysis.PloS one · 2023Article
- Pain prevalence in hospitalized patients at a tertiary academic medical center: Exploring severe persistent pain.PloS one · 2020Article
- Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background. Since data on pain evaluation and management in patients admitted to internal medicine wards (IMWs) are limited, we aimed to evaluate these aspects in a cohort of internistic patients. Methods. We considered all patients consecutively admitted from June to December 2011 to our unit. Age, gender, and length-of-hospital-stay (LOS) were recorded. Comorbidities were arbitrarily defined, and pain severity was evaluated by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) on admission and discharge. Results. The final sample consisted of 526 patients (mean age 74 ± 14 years; 308 women). Significant pain (NRS ≥ 3) was detected in 63% of cases, and severe (NRS ≥ 7) in 7.6%. Pain was successfully treated, and NRS decreased from 4.65 ± 2.05 to 0.89 ± 1.3 (P < 0.001). Compared with subjects with NRS < 3, those with significant pain were older (75.5 ± 13.9 versus 72.9 ± 14.5 years, P = 0.038), and had a higher LOS (7.9 ± 6.1 versus 7.3 ± 6.8, P = 0.048). Significant pain was independently associated with age (OR 0.984, P = 0.018), cancer (OR 3.347, P < 0.001), musculoskeletal disease (OR 3.054, P < 0.0001), biliary disease (OR 3.100, P < 0.01), and bowel disease (OR 3.100, P < 0.003). Conclusion. In an internal medicine setting, multiple diseases represent significant cause of pain. Prompt pain evaluation and management should be performed as soon as possible, in order to avoid patients' suffering and reduce the need of hospital stay.
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.