ArticleNursing open2016
A mixed-method study of pain management practice in a UK children's hospital: identification of barriers and developing strategies to maintain effective in-patient paediatric pain management.
Article in Nursing open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Pain and pain management in children and adolescents receiving hospital care: a cross-sectional study from Sweden.BMC pediatrics · 2022Article
- Using ways of knowing in nursing to develop educational strategies that support knowledge mobilization.Paediatric & neonatal pain · 2020Review
- Dynamics on the field: a focused study on the culture and context of pediatric pain management at four Ghanaian hospitals.BMC pediatrics · 2020Article
- Nursing-Related Barriers to Children's Pain Management at Selected Hospitals in Ghana: A Descriptive Qualitative Study.Pain research & management · 2020Article
- Acute pain management in children: a survey of Italian pediatricians.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo assess Acute Pain Service and paediatric pain management efficacy in a UK specialist paediatric hospital to inform wider recommendations for future sustainability.
backgroundUK paediatric acute pain services vary. Although comprehensive pain management guidelines exist, consensus on the best model of care is lacking. Worldwide, medical and pharmacological advances and rapid patient turnover have increased the challenges of managing hospitalized children's pain. Simultaneously nurses, who deliver the bulk of pain management, have experienced reduction in skill mix and training opportunities. Specialist Acute Pain Services have evolved to meet these demands; their overall efficacy is unknown.
designThis mixed-methods study explores pain management practice at a UK paediatric hospital to assess current efficacy and future sustainability.
methodA 2013 case note review of all Acute Pain Services referrals over 14 days were compared with an interval sample of concurrent non-referred inpatient children; seven semi-structured interviews were conducted with a range of clinical staff.
resultsTwenty-two referrals of 15 children were made; 15 comparison children were identified. All 30 children (100%) were appropriately referred/non-referred. Acute Pain Services cases experienced higher pain levels, were more likely to have long term conditions, longer hospital stay and repeat admissions. Three key themes emerged through interview analysis: 'addressing pain', 'changing contexts' 'pain as an "expert" skill'. Increased specialization, reduced clarity between different pain modalities and decreased training opportunities had resulted in potentially unsustainable APS dependence.
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.