ArticlePloS one2026
Assessment of acute pain and its management in an urban emergency department in Ghana.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAcute pain is classified as pain that lasts less than three to six months. Globally, pain is the third most common health problem with more than a quarter of patients reporting to the Emergency Department (ED) with pain-related chief complaints. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of acute pain and assess the pain management practices in the Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital Emergency Department (KATH ED).
methodsUsing the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), the characteristics of acute pain among 378 patients presenting to KATH ED were measured. Additionally, the waiting time for the first pain treatment was calculated for each patient. Pain scores (pre- and post-treatment) were also taken to further inform patients' satisfaction.
resultsOut of 378 patients, 76% [95% CI: 71.3-80.2] reported to the ED with severe pain, 21% [95% CI: 16.9-25.4] reported with moderate pain, and 3% [95% CI: 1.5-5.1] reported with mild pain. The average waiting time for the initial assessment of pain was 83.97 minutes while the average waiting time for the administration of analgesia was 184.07 minutes. Having completed primary (AOR, 5.36; 95% CI, 1.03-27.97), JHS (AOR, 5.8; 95% CI, 1.19-28.35), SHS (AOR, 7.24; 95% CI, 1.38-38.01) and tertiary (AOR, 9.42; 95% CI, 1.60-55.62) were predictive of Door‑to‑Analgesia (DTA) time ≤ 90 minutes. Nearly three quarters of the study participants had maximum satisfaction with the pain management services in the ED.
conclusionThe study revealed that documentation of pain severity scores of patients presenting with acute pain at KATH ED was encouraging, however, most patients did not receive timely pain relief. The average waiting time for the initial assessment of pain as well as the administration of analgesia was extremely prolonged. Despite this, three out of every four of the study participants had maximum satisfaction for the overall pain treatment services in the ED. These findings suggest that pain management practices at KATH ED need improvement.
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.