ArticleBritish journal of pain2019
The National Pain Audit for specialist pain services in England and Wales 2010-2014.
Article in British journal of pain, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Adaptive Mentoring Networks and Compassionate Care: A Qualitative Exploration of Mentorship for Chronic Pain, Substance Use Disorders and Mental Health.Journal of CME · 2024Article
- The Management of Chronic Pain: Re-Centring Person-Centred Care.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- The core minimum dataset for measuring pain outcomes in pain services across Scotland. Developing and testing a brief multi-dimensional questionnaire.British journal of pain · 2022Article
- UK healthcare services for people with fibromyalgia: results from two web-based national surveys (the PACFiND study).BMC health services research · 2022Article
- A national survey of publicly funded chronic pain management services in Ireland.Irish journal of medical science · 2022Article
- Patient Perspectives on the Appropriate Use of Prescribed Opioids in Chronic Non-Malignant Pain: Analysis of Online Forums Using Theoretical Domains Framework.Journal of pain research · 2022Article
- Advances and Pitfalls of Specialized Pain Care through Public and Private Health Care Providers in Catalonia and the Balearic Islands: A Physician's Survey.Pain research & management · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNumerous reports highlight variations in pain clinic provision between services, particularly in the provision of multidisciplinary services and length of waiting times. A National Audit aims to identify and quantify these variations, to facilitate raising standards of care in identified areas of need. This article describes a Quality Improvement Programme cycle covering England and Wales that used such an approach to remedy the paucity of data on the current state of UK pain clinics.
methodsClinics were audited over a 4-year period using standards developed by the Faculty of Pain Medicine of The Royal College of Anaesthetists. Reporting was according to guidance from a recent systematic review of national surveys of pain clinics. A range of quality improvement measures was introduced via a series of roadshows led by the British Pain Society.
results94% of clinics responded to the first audit and 83% responded to the second. Per annum, 0.4% of the total national population was estimated to attend a specialist pain service. A significant improvement in multidisciplinary staffing was found (35-56%, p < 0.001) over the 4-year audit programme, although this still requires improvement. Very few clinics achieved recommended evidence-based waiting times, although only 2.5% fell outside government targets; this did not improve. Safety standards were generally met. Clinicians often failed to code diagnoses.
conclusionA National Audit found that while generally safe many specialist pain services in England and Wales fell below recommended standards of care. Waiting times and staffing require improvement if patients are to get effective and timely care. Diagnostic coding also requires improvement.
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.