Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27722795›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2017

The impact of a simplified documentation method for the Edmonton classification system for cancer pain (ECS-CP) on clinician utilization.

Kimberson Tanco, Joseph Arthur, Ali Haider, Saneese Stephen, Sriram Yennu, Diane Liu, Eduardo Bruera

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Assessing the prognostic features of a pain classification system in advanced cancer patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Kimberson TancoDepartment of Palliative Care, Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd. Unit 1414, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. kctanco@mdanderson.org.
Joseph ArthurDepartment of Palliative Care, Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd. Unit 1414, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Ali HaiderDepartment of Palliative Care, Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd. Unit 1414, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Saneese StephenDepartment of Palliative Care, Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd. Unit 1414, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Sriram YennuDepartment of Palliative Care, Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd. Unit 1414, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Diane LiuDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Eduardo BrueraDepartment of Palliative Care, Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd. Unit 1414, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe use of standardized pain classification systems such as the ECS-CP can assist in the assessment and management of cancer pain. However, its completion has been limited due to its perceived complexity of decoding each feature. The objectives of this study were to determine the rate of clinician documentation and completion of the ECS-CP features after revision and simplification of the response for each feature.

methodsElectronic records of consecutive patient visits at the outpatient supportive care center seen by 12 palliative medicine specialists were collected at 6 months before (pre-interventional period), 6 and 24 months after (post-interventional period) the implementation of the simplified ECS-CP tool. Rate of ECS-CP documentation, completion, and analysis of patient and physician predictors were completed.

resultsOne thousand and twelve patients' documentation was analyzed: 343 patients, before; 341 patients, 6 months after, and 328 patients, 24 months after the intervention. ≥2/5 items were completed before the intervention, 6 months after the intervention and 24 months after intervention in 0/343 (0 %), 136/341 (40 %), and 238/328 (73 %), respectively (p < 0.001). 5/5 items were completed before the intervention, 6 months after the intervention and 24 months after intervention in 0/343 (0 %), 131/341 (38 %), and 222/328 (68 %), respectively, (p < 0.001). There were no patient or physician predictors found significant for successful documentation of ECS-CP.

conclusionOur findings suggest that significant simplification and intensive education is necessary for successful adoption of a scoring system. More research is needed in order to identify how to adopt tools for daily clinical practice in palliative care.

Indexed as

AdultCancer PainDocumentationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPain MeasurementCancer painECS-CPEdmonton classification system for cancer painStandardized pain classification systemStandardized pain score

Identifiers

PMID27722795

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.