Observational studyNursing open2023
Do we really know if they are in pain? A cross-sectional study in hospitalised adult patients in Spain.
Observational study in Nursing open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of context on nurse-led implementation of evidence-based pain management practices in the Sumamos Excelencia project: a qualitative study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Pain in Hospital: A Real-Word Data Analysis.Nursing open · 2025Article
- Mediating and Suppressing Effects of Coping Styles Between Resilience and Empathy for Pain in Clinical Nurses: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
- Do we really know if they are in pain? A cross-sectional study in hospitalised adult patients in Spain.Nursing open · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo describe the prevalence and characteristics of pain in adult hospitalised patients, as well as to analyse the concordance between patient-reported and recorded pain and its impact on analgesic management.
designA cross sectional study.
methodsThe study was performed on a sample of 611 patients, from October to December 2017. Data were obtained from patient interviews, review of medical and nursing records and review of electronic prescribing.
resultsThe prevalence of pain at the time of the interview was 36.7%. The median VAS score was 4. 90% of the patients had their pain assessed within the last 24 h; however, concordance between patient-reported pain and recorded pain in the nursing record was slight.
conclusionPain is still often documented inadequately. Despite the wide use of analgesics, half of the patients with moderate to severe pain do not have adequate pain management. A systematic assessment and recording of pain promotes appropriate analgesic prescription. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE: The findings of our study provide insight into the main gaps in the correct management of pain in hospitalised patients. A systematic assessment and recording of the pain suffered by the patient facilitates its control and allows a better management of the analgesic prescription by the physician. This information could help hospital managers to develop training programmes on pain assessment and on the importance of doctor-nurse collaboration to improve pain management, increasing the quality of care and reducing hospital costs. REPORTING
methodThe study has adhered to the relevant EQUATOR guidelines, according to The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.
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.