Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32451747›Full record

ArticleSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2020

[Pain therapy care in Germany-Do patients receiving day care differ from those receiving outpatient or inpatient care at the start of treatment? : A further evaluation based on the KEDOQ-pain data set].

M Hüppe, S Kükenshöner, K Böhme, F Bosse, H-R Casser, T Kohlmann, G Lindena, B Nagel, M Pfingsten, F Petzke

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Screening of Patient Impairments in an Outpatient Clinic for Suspected Rare Diseases-A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

10 authors.

M HüppeKlinik für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin, Universität zu Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Deutschland. michael.hueppe@uni-luebeck.de.
S KükenshönerKlinik für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin, Universität zu Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Deutschland.
K BöhmeSchmerzzentrum Kassel, Kassel, Deutschland.
F BosseRKH Kassel, Kassel, Deutschland.
H-R CasserDRK Schmerz-Zentrum Mainz, Mainz, Deutschland.
T KohlmannInstitut für Community Medicine, Universität Greifswald, Greifswald, Deutschland.
G LindenaCLARA Klinische und Versorgungsforschung Kleinmachnow, Kleinmachnow, Deutschland.
B NagelDRK Schmerz-Zentrum Mainz, Mainz, Deutschland.
M PfingstenSchmerzklinik, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Göttingen, Deutschland.
F PetzkeSchmerzklinik, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Göttingen, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The direct comparison of day care pain patients with patients from other treatment sectors with respect to sociodemographic, pain-related and psychological characteristics has not yet been the subject of systematic analyses. The project core documentation and quality assurance in pain therapy (KEDOQ-pain) of the German Pain Society (Deutsche Schmerzgesellschaft e.V.) makes this comparison possible. This second analysis of the available KEDOQ data was intended to show how patients receiving day care treatment can be characterized using the core data set and whether and to what extent they differ from patients receiving outpatient or inpatient treatment. This is a continuation of the first publication, which showed remarkably small differences between outpatients and inpatients but did not include day care patients.The KEDOQ-pain data from 25 centers with a total of 8953 patients were evaluated. Patients had completed the German pain questionnaire (DSF) between January 2012 and March 2017 and received day care (n = 1264), outpatient (n = 4082) or inpatient (n = 3607) pain therapy treatment. Sociodemographic, pain-related and psychometric data of the DSF reported by patients were evaluated as well as physician information on the pain chronification stage and pain localization. The evaluation was descriptive and compared groups using univariate and multivariate procedures.Day care treated patients were significantly younger, had a higher level of education, were more frequently employed, reported higher impairment values and showed a higher severity index according to von Korff than inpatients and outpatients treated for pain. In addition, they described a shorter pain duration as well as worse habitual well-being (Marburg questionnaire on habitual well-being, MFHW). These predictors explained roughly half of the variance in the prediction of the day care treatment setting. The comparison of outpatients and inpatients showed significant group differences for some variables; however, the effects were very small.The evaluations suggest that pain therapy day care facilities treat a special group of pain patients that significantly differ from patients in other treatment sectors. Cautious conclusions are drawn regarding the systematic allocation of patients to care appropriate to their treatment needs.

Indexed as

Day Care, MedicalOutpatientsPain ManagementGermanyHumansInpatientsPainHealthcare researchKEDOQ-painPain day care hospitalQuality assuranceTreatment setting

Identifiers

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.