Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35842680›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2022

Study protocol: development and pilot testing of the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool for families (CPOT-Fam).

Anmol Shahid, Victoria S Owen, Bonnie G Sept, Shelly Longmore, Andrea Soo, Rebecca Brundin-Mather, Karla D Krewulak, Stephana J Moss, Kara M Plotnikoff, Céline Gélinas and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The Critical Care Pain Observation Tool for Families (CPOT-Fam).Canadian journal of pain = Revue canadienne de la douleur · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Leveraging voice biomarkers to quantify chronic pain: a rapid review.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

12 authors.

Anmol ShahidDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary & Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5638-4988
Victoria S OwenDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary & Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Bonnie G SeptDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary & Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Shelly LongmoreDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary & Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Andrea SooDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary & Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Rebecca Brundin-MatherDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary & Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Karla D KrewulakDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary & Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Stephana J MossDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary & Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Kara M PlotnikoffDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary & Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Céline GélinasCentre for Nursing Research and Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital - CIUSSS West-Central-Montreal, Ingram School of Nursing, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Kirsten M Fiest *Department of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary & Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Henry T Stelfox *Department of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary & Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Tstelfox@ucalgary.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients in the intensive care unit (ICU) often have limited ability to communicate making it more difficult to identify and effectively treat their pain. Family caregivers or close friends of critically ill patients may be able to identify signs of pain before the clinical care team and could potentially assist in routine pain assessments. This study will adapt the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) for use by family members to create the CPOT-Fam and compare family CPOT-Fam assessments with nurse-provided CPOT assessments for a given patient.

methodsThis study will be executed in two phases: 1) Development of the CPOT-Fam - A working group of patient partners, ICU clinicians, and researchers will adapt the CPOT for use by family caregivers (creating the CPOT-Fam) and produce an accompanying educational module to deliver information on pain and how to use the tool. The CPOT-Fam will undergo preclinical testing with participants (i.e., members of the public and family caregivers of critically ill adults), who will complete the educational module and provide CPOT-Fam scores on sample cases. Feedback on the CPOT-Fam will be collected. 2) Pilot testing the CPOT - Fam family caregivers of critically ill adults will complete the educational module and provide information on the following: (1) demographics, (2) anxiety, (3) caregiving self-efficacy, and (4) satisfaction with care in the ICU. Family caregivers will then provide a proxy assessment of their critically ill loved one's pain through the CPOT-Fam and also provide a subjective (i.e., questionnaire-based including open-ended responses) account of their loved one's pain status. A comparison (i.e., agreement) will be made between family caregiver provided CPOT-Fam scores and ICU nurse-provided CPOT scores (collected from the provincial health information system), calculated independently and blinded to one another. Feasibility and acceptability of the CPOT-Fam will be determined. DISCUSSION: The results of this work will produce a family caregiver CPOT (i.e., CPOT-Fam), determine feasibility and acceptability of the CPOT-Fam, and compare pain assessments conducted by family caregivers and ICU nurses. The results will inform whether a larger study to determine a role for family caregivers in ICU pain assessment using the CPOT-Fam is warranted.

Indexed as

Critical Care Pain Observation ToolFamily partnershipIntensive care unit painPain assessmentTool development

Identifiers

PMID35842680
PMCPMC9287531

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.