Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39474515›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)2024

Evaluating pain in non-verbal critical care patients: a narrative review of the critical care pain observation tool and Its clinical applications.

Abebe Dilie Afenigus

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. 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

1 author.

Abebe Dilie AfenigusDepartment of Nursing, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Debre Markos University, Debre Markos, Ethiopia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Assessing pain in critically ill patients who cannot communicate verbally poses significant challenges. Traditional self-report measures are ineffective for these patients, making the need for reliable observational tools crucial. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness, reliability, and clinical applicability of the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) in various intensive care unit (ICU) settings and to explore potential innovations for improving its use and integration into clinical practice. Methods: A narrative review evaluated the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) for non-communicative ICU patients, comparing it to the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) and the FLACC scale. The review assessed CPOT's effectiveness across different ICU settings, identified limitations and challenges, and explored potential enhancements such as electronic scoring, additional physiological indicators, and improved training protocols. Results: The CPOT has been validated as an effective pain assessment tool for non-verbal ICU patients. It evaluates pain through facial expressions, body movements, muscle tension, and ventilator compliance. The CPOT shows superior sensitivity at 76.5% compared to 62.7% for the BPS and offers a more comprehensive assessment of pain indicators like muscle tension and ventilator compliance than the FLACC scale. Despite its strengths, the CPOT has limitations, including inter-rater variability and challenges in certain patient populations. Barriers to implementation include resource constraints and the need for extensive training. Conclusion: The Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) is a highly effective instrument for assessing pain in non-verbal ICU patients, demonstrating superior accuracy and reliability compared to other tools like the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) and FLACC scale. Its detailed approach, covering facial expressions, body movements, muscle tension, and ventilator compliance, offers a detailed measure of pain. However, challenges such as inter-rater variability and limitations in specific patient populations highlight the need for ongoing refinement and research.

Indexed as

clinical applicationscritical carecritical care pain observation toolnon-verbal patientpain evaluation

Identifiers

PMID39474515
PMCPMC11518793

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.