ArticleSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2022
[Applicability of QUIKS in conservatively treated tumor inpatients].
Article in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundQuality improvement in conservative pain management (QUIKS), a module for nonoperative patients in the QUIPS project was tested on a cohort of tumor patients regarding its applicability. MATERIAL AND
methodsConservatively treated inpatients at the University Hospital of Würzburg (UKW) were prospectively surveyed on the quality of pain management using the QUIKS outcome questionnaire (AZ 129/17, Ethics Committee at UKW). Information on therapy and demographics was taken from the hospital's internal documentation system.
resultsDuring the data collection period 100 conservatively treated inhouse tumor patients from different hospitals were included. Of the patients 74% required assistance in answering the questionnaire. Functional limitations or pain treatment-related side effects were present in 77% of the patients; the average pain level was 6 on the numerical rating scale. The most commonly reported type of pain was back pain and headache. Of the patients 18% received pain therapy with opioids and 26% with nonopioids, adjustment was made in 5% with opioids and in 44% with nonopioids and pain medicine specialists were consulted in 9% of cases.
conclusionThe application of the questionnaire was well accepted by the patients but required a high level of assistance in completing it. A high level of pain was observed during the hospital stay and the adjustment of pain therapy or the involvement of pain medicine specialists was rare. The interpretation of statements regarding the quality of tumor pain may be limited as other (pre-existing) pain entities, such as nontumor-associated pain or chronic tumor pain could not be clearly delineated.
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.