Impact of a nurse-led intervention on quality of life in patients with chronic non-malignant pain: An open randomized controlled trial.

AIMS: To determine the effect of a comprehensive nurse-led programme for patients with chronic non-malignant pain, on quality of life, level of pain, anxiety, and depression, as primary outcomes and patients' satisfaction as a secondary end point. DESIGN: An open-label randomized controlled trial was carried out. METHODS: The experimental group received both a nurse-led intervention on healthy lifestyles, education on self-esteem, pain awareness, communication, and relaxation techniques. The control group received usual care. Quality of life, level of pain, anxiety, and depression were the main outcomes. Data were obtained at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and 6 and 9 months. The study was carried out from 2015-2017. RESULTS: The sample was composed of 279 patients. At 9 months, the effect size (non-parametric effect size statistic A) favoured the intervention group for SF-36 mental health score (A = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.73-0.85), anxiety (A = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.51-0.65), pain intensity (A = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.51-0.64), and depression (A = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.51-0.65). Smaller differences were found on physical scores between the intervention and the usual care group. Patients showed a high level of satisfaction with the introduced intervention. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive nurse-led programme for patients with chronic non-malignant pain has a positive impact on their quality of life, level of pain, and mental health. IMPACT: Studies have reported that the problem of chronic pain is not optimally controlled. A structured nurse-led programme has been tested to facilitate healthy behaviours to help patients manage their chronic pain and to provide them with the necessary tools for their self-care. This nurse-led intervention improved their mental health and decreased their level of pain.

Impact on quality of life of a nursing intervention programme for patients with chronic non-cancer pain: an open, randomized controlled parallel study protocol.

AIM: To determine the effect of a nurse-led intervention programme for patients with chronic non-cancer pain. BACKGROUND: Chronic non-cancer pain is a widespread health problem and one that is insufficiently controlled. Nurses can play a vital role in pain management, using best practices in the assessment and management of pain under a holistic approach where the patient plays a proactive role in addressing the disease process. Improving the quality of life, reducing disability, achieving acceptance of health status, coping and breaking the vicious circle of pain should be the prime objectives of our care management programme. DESIGN: Open randomized parallel controlled study. METHODS: The experimental group will undertake one single initial session, followed by six group sessions led by nurses, aimed at empowering patients for the self-management of pain. Healthy behaviours will be encouraged, such as sleep and postural hygiene, promotion of physical activity and healthy eating. Educational interventions on self-esteem, pain-awareness, communication and relaxing techniques will be carried out. As primary end points, quality of life, perceived level of pain, anxiety and depression will be evaluated. Secondary end points will be coping and satisfaction. Follow-up will be performed at 12 and 24 weeks. The study was approved by the Ethics and Research Committee Costa del Sol. DISCUSSION: If significant effects were detected, impact on quality of life through a nurse-led programme would offer a complementary service to existing pain clinics for a group of patients with frequent unmet needs.

Instruments for assessing the risk of falls in acute hospitalized patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Falls are a serious problem for hospitalized patients, reducing the duration and quality of life. It is estimated that over 84% of all adverse events in hospitalized patients are related to falls. Some fall risk assessment tools have been developed and tested in environments other than those for which they were developed with serious validity discrepancies. The aim of this review is to determine the accuracy of instruments for detecting fall risk and predicting falls in acute hospitalized patients. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Main databases, related websites and grey literature were searched. Two blinded reviewers evaluated title and abstracts of the selected articles and, if they met inclusion criteria, methodological quality was assessed in a new blinded process. Meta-analyses of diagnostic ORs (DOR) and likelihood (LH) coefficients were performed with the random effects method. Forest plots were calculated for sensitivity and specificity, DOR and LH. Additionally, summary ROC (SROC) curves were calculated for every analysis. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were selected for the review. The meta-analysis was performed with the Morse (MFS), STRATIFY and Hendrich II Fall Risk Model scales. The STRATIFY tool provided greater diagnostic validity, with a DOR value of 7.64 (4.86 - 12.00). A meta-regression was performed to assess the effect of average patient age over 65 years and the performance or otherwise of risk reassessments during the patient's stay. The reassessment showed a significant reduction in the DOR on the MFS (rDOR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.64 - 0.89, p = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: The STRATIFY scale was found to be the best tool for assessing the risk of falls by hospitalized acutely-ill adults. However, the behaviour of these instruments varies considerably depending on the population and the environment, and so their operation should be tested prior to implementation. Further studies are needed to investigate the effect of the reassessment of these instruments with respect to hospitalized adult patients, and to consider the real compliance by healthcare personnel with procedures related to patient safety, and in particular concerning the prevention of falls.

Gender differences in perceived pain and health-related quality of life in people with chronic non-malignant pain: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain has a disproportionate impact on members of vulnerable population groups, and women are at substantially greater risk than men of suffering multiple chronic pain disorders. Moreover, one of the aspects most affected by the presence of chronic pain is that of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), worsening over time, as the disease persists. OBJECTIVES: To describe the profile of patients who suffer non-malignant chronic pain, from a gender perspective, and to identify factors related to their HRQoL and mental health. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was carried out in patients with chronic non-cancer pain. METHODS: Sociodemographic variables, pain intensity at rest and in motion, SF-36 health questionnaire, anxiety, and depression were evaluated. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 531 subjects, of whom 64.2% were women. The mean age was 52.9 (SD: 10.4) years. The pain intensity recorded on the visual analogue scale was 6 (SD: 2.7) at rest and 8 (SD: 2) in motion. Physical component score and mental component score of quality of life were worse in women vs men: 33.73 (6.77) vs 32.33 (6.20), for the physical component; 36.89 (12.77) vs 32.91 (11.51), for mental component. Anxiety, depression and pain intensity, showed poorer results in women. CONCLUSION: Gender is a factor that should be considered in assessing and managing chronic pain, due to its influence on the perception of pain, and HRQoL. IMPACT STATEMENT: Gender is an important modifier of the perception of pain, and HRQoL. To achieve a patient-centred approach, nurses should incorporate gender as a differential factor to adapt and individualize pain management and patient education.