Nurses' clinical decision-making regarding the management of pain.

Effective pain management remains an elusive goal within the profession of nursing. While considerable improvement has occurred, patients continue to experience inappropriate levels of pain. To date, research has focused on objective factors that influence pain management. Few studies have examined attitudinal factors that may influence nurses' decision-making. This quasi-experiment was based on preliminary data showing that nurses' preconceived notions regarding certain patient groups influenced their management of pain. An intervention was tested for its' effect on nurses' preconceived notions regarding specific patient groups. A significant difference in a positive direction was found. Nurses were more willing to spend time and energy managing pain across all patient groups following the intervention.

Nurses' clinical decision-making regarding the management of pain.

Effective pain management remains an elusive goal within the profession of nursing. While considerable improvement has occurred, patients continue to experience inappropriate levels of pain. To date, research has focused on objective factors that influence pain management. Few studies have examined attitudinal factors that may influence nurses' decision-making. This quasi-experiment was based on preliminary data showing that nurses' preconceived notions regarding certain patient groups influenced their management of pain. An intervention was tested for its' effect on nurses' preconceived notions regarding specific patient groups. A significant difference in a positive direction was found. Nurses were more willing to spend time and energy managing pain across all patient groups following the intervention.

Cancer pain management skills among medical students: the development of a Cancer Pain Objective Structured Clinical Examination.

Recent surveys suggest that most physicians have inadequate knowledge to assess and manage cancer pain; however, the important domain of clinical performance has not yet been clearly evaluated. The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) has become a widely- used and accepted method to evaluate the clinical abilities of medical students. The purpose of this study was to develop and test a Cancer Pain OSCE for medical students evaluating their clinical competence in the area of cancer pain management. A four-component Cancer Pain OSCE was developed and presented to 34 third-year medical students during a sixteen-week combined medicine/surgery clerkship. The content of the objective criteria for each component of the OSCE was developed by a multidisciplinary group of pain experts. The OSCE was designed to assess the students' cancer pain management skills of pain history-taking, focused physical examination, analgesic management of cancer pain, and communication of opioid analgesia myths. Actual cancer survivors were used in the five-minute individual stations. The students were asked to complete a cancer pain history, physical examination, manage cancer pain using analgesics, and communicate with a family member regarding opioid myths. Clinical performance was evaluated using pre-defined checklists. Results showed the student's average performance for the history component was the highest of all four components of the examination. Out of 34 points possible on this clinical skills item, students on average (SD) scored 24.5 (5.2), or 72%. For the short-answer analgesic management component of the Cancer Pain OSCE, the overall score was 32%. Most students managed cancer pain with opioids, however, very few prescribed regular opioid use, and the use of adjuvant analgesics was uncommon. Student performance on the focused cancer pain physical examination was, in general, poor. On average students scored 61% on the musculoskeletal system, but only 31% on both the neurological and lymphathic examination. The overall percent score for the cancer pain OSCE was 48%. We conclude that the Cancer Pain OSCE is a useful performance-based tool to test individual skills in the essential components of cancer pain assessment and management. Of the four components of the Cancer Pain OSCE, medical students performed best on the cancer pain history and performed poorly on the cancer pain physical examination. Information gained from this study will provide a foundation on which future small-group medical student structured teaching will be based.

Cancer pain education: a structured clinical instruction module for hospice nurses.

The learning experience with the Cancer Pain Structured Clinical Instruction Module (SCIM), a highly structured skills training course for medical students, has been reported favorably. The purpose of this study was to present the Cancer Pain SCIM to registered nurses employed in a hospice setting. The goal of the study was to pilot test a structured cancer pain educational program for hospice nurses and to determine the perceived effectiveness of this course on the participants' cancer pain assessment and management skills. A multidisciplinary Cancer Pain SCIM was presented to 25 hospice nurses to improve their understanding of the management of cancer pain. The development group identified essential aspects of cancer pain management and then developed checklists defining specific station content. During the 2-hour Cancer Pain SCIM, nurses rotated through 8 stations in groups of 3, spending 15 minutes at each station. Eight instructors and 6 standardized patients, 5 of whom were survivors of cancer, participated in the course. All participants (students, instructors, and patients) evaluated the course, using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). Nurses provided self-assessments of their perceived competence on important aspects of cancer pain management both before and after the SCIM. The self-assessment items used a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (not competent) to 5 (very competent). Twenty-five hospice nurses, averaging 4.1 years (range 1-30 years) postgraduation, participated in the Cancer Pain SCIM. Overall, nurses agreed that they improved on each of the 8 teaching items (P < 0.001). The average (SD) pretest score of 2.8 (0.72) improved to 3.8 (0.58) on the post-test (P < 0.001). Nurses believed that their mastery of specific clinical skills, taught in all 8 stations, improved as a result of participation in the course. Nurses strongly agreed (mean +/- SD) that it was beneficial to use patients with cancer in the course (4.6 +/- 0.82). Faculty members enjoyed participating in the course (4.9 +/- 0.35) and indicated a willingness to participate in future courses (4.7 +/- 0.49). Significant perceived learning among hospice nurses took place in all aspects of the Cancer Pain SCIM. Participating nurses, instructors, and patients with cancer appreciated the SCIM format. Nurses and faculty considered the participation of actual patients with cancer highly beneficial. The SCIM format has great potential to improve the quality of cancer pain education.

Cancer pain assessment and management recommendations by hospice nurses. University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky.

Pain is often the most prevalent symptom among cancer patients referred to hospice or palliative care programs. This study was designed to use performance-based testing to evaluate the skills of hospice nurses in assessing the severe pain of a cancer patient and the pain management recommendations they would present to the patient's primary care physician. Twenty-seven hospice nurses (ranging in experience from 1 month to 10 years) were presented with the same standardized patient with cancer pain. In Part A (7 minutes), one of the investigators checked for predetermined behaviors as the nurses performed the clinical pain assessment. In Part B (7 minutes), the nurses answered questions regarding their recommendations for pain management for the patient seen in Part A. In the admission pain assessment, hospice nurses did well in assessing pain intensity (85%), pain location (70%), and pain-relieving factors (59%). However, only 48% of the nurses adequately assessed the pain onset, and only 44% adequately assessed other symptoms the patient might be experiencing. In Part B, 96% of the nurses recommended opioids, 96% recommended the oral route of administration, and 82% recommended regular dosing of the opioids. Fifty-six percent of nurses included a breakthrough medication in their analgesic recommendations. All of the hospice nurses treated the patient's fear of addiction in an appropriate manner, and 93% of the nurses recommended increasing the patient's opioid dosage to treat the persisting pain problem. There were no significant differences among nurses with regard to length of time as a hospice nurse or hospice certification on any of the items in either Part A or Part B. Most practicing hospice nurses were judged to be competent in the assessment and management of the severe pain of the standardized cancer patient, although some deficits were noted. Regular oral opioids were the analgesics of choice. Co-analgesics were rarely recommended.

Cancer pain education among family physicians.

This study used performance-based testing (objective structured clinical evaluation, OSCE) to evaluate the skills of family physicians in assessing and managing the severe pain of a cancer patient, and evaluated a new method of education about the management of cancer pain. Twenty-four primary care physicians completed a detailed pain assessment of the same standardized cancer pain patient (Part A). A proctor observed the interviews and rated the physicians on a variety of pre-determined items believed to be important for pain assessment. The physicians were then allowed 5 min to answer management questions about the patient's cancer pain (Part B). After reviewing each physician's performance on Parts A and B, the proctor provided immediate feedback and instruction (Part C) on basic principles of cancer pain assessment and management. On average, the primary care physicians asked 52% (+/-4.5%) of the indicated questions of a detailed pain assessment. Performance was poorest in asking about previous pain history, temporal pattern of pain, and pain intensity. Performance on the pain assessment was best for eliciting pain location and pain-relieving factors. Primary care physicians obtained mean scores of 36% (+/-3%) on Part B of the OSCE. Although opioid therapy was frequently prescribed, only 42% of prescriptions were for regular administration. Performance on Parts A and B correlated poorly with years in practice, and older physicians tended to perform a less detailed pain assessment than their younger colleagues. Most physicians enjoyed participating in this instructional formal and believed that the proctor feedback increased the educational value of the module. The results of our study suggest that many family physicians may be inadequate in their clinical assessment and management of cancer pain. Our study supports the need for continuing education in cancer pain management, regardless of years in practice. Further study should evaluate the effects of different educational programs on clinical practice in patient care.