Pain and pain management in children and adolescents receiving hospital care: a cross-sectional study from Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common symptom in children receiving hospital care. Adequate pain management in paediatric patients is of the utmost importance. Few studies have investigated children's own experiences of pain during hospitalization. AIM: To describe the prevalence of pain, self-reported pain intensity at rest and during movement, pain management and compliance with pain treatment guidelines in children and adolescents receiving hospital care. Furthermore, to examine self-reported statements about pain relief and how often staff asked about pain. METHODS: A quantitative, cross-sectional study with descriptive statistics as the data analysis method was conducted at a county hospital in western Sweden. Sixty-nine children/adolescents aged 6-18 years who had experienced pain during their hospital stay were included. A structured, verbally administered questionnaire was used to obtain pain reports. The participants were also asked what they considered alleviated pain and how often they told staff about pain. Patient demographics, prescribed analgesics and documentation of pain rating were obtained from medical records. RESULTS: Fifty children/adolescents (72%) experienced moderate to severe pain in the previous 24 hours. At the time of the interview 36% reported moderate to severe pain at rest and 58% during movement. Seven participants (10%) reported severe pain both at rest and during movement. About one-third were on a regular multimodal analgesic regimen and 28% had used a validated pain rating scale. Thirty children/adolescents (43%) reported that they had experienced procedural pain in addition to their underlying pain condition. Most of the children/adolescents (74%) reported that analgesics provided pain relief. Forty (58%) stated that various non-pharmacological methods were helpful. CONCLUSIONS: Despite evidence-based guidelines, half of the children/adolescents experienced moderate to severe pain, highlighting the need for improvement. Pain levels should be assessed both at rest and during movement. Response to treatment should be evaluated to prevent undertreatment of pain. Compliance with guidelines and professional communication are of the utmost importance for pain management in children/adolescents. Non-pharmacological methods are a valuable part of a pain management strategy. This study shows that it is important to evaluate and improve pain care also outside specialised tertiary clinics.

Benefits of using the Brief Pain Inventory in patients with cancer pain: an intervention study conducted in Swedish hospitals.

PURPOSE: The prevalence of cancer pain is too high. There is a need for improvement of pain management in cancer care. The aim of this study was to explore whether the use of the multidimensional pain assessment questionnaire Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) could improve pain relief in hospitalized patients with cancer. METHODS: A controlled intervention study was performed at two hospitals in western Sweden, 264 patients were included, 132 formed a control group and 132 an intervention group. All participants completed the BPI and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) at baseline. Only the researcher had access to questionnaires from the control group. The completed forms from the intervention group were presented to the patients' care team. A follow-up took place after 2-5 days when patients in both groups rated the scales a second time. RESULTS: In the intervention group, significant differences in all measured items of the BPI were found at follow-up compared with baseline. Symptoms rated with the ESAS also decreased significantly, except shortness of breath. At follow-up, a significant increase in regular use of paracetamol, anti-neuropathic pain drugs and opioids was found, as well as elevated doses of fixed-schedule opioids. In the control group, differences between baseline and follow-up were significant regarding average pain and worst pain over the past 24 h. CONCLUSION: Presenting the patient-reported BPI to the care team helped them to focus on patients' pain, identify pain mechanisms and adjust analgesics accordingly. A possible explanation for the results is changes in the medication prescribed.

Pain and pain management in hospitalized patients before and after an intervention.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Studies have shown that pain is common among hospitalized patients and that there is a lack of compliance with pain management guidelines. Improving pain management does not only involve developing new drugs or technology; even more important is an effective organisation that utilises existing expertise. The aim of this study was to investigate whether pain in hospitalized patients can be reduced by implementing evidence-based pain management guidelines, providing education for staff and an organisation that includes pain responsibility nurses. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out between 2009 and 2010 at two hospitals in southwest Sweden, comprising a baseline survey followed by an intervention. The study involved 306 patients, who answered questions about pain intensity at rest and while moving, disturbed sleep due to pain and whether they had used a pain rating scale while in hospital. Medical records were scrutinised for analgesic prescriptions. An intervention then took place, involving implementation of evidence-based guidelines, staff education and the introduction of pain responsibility nurses. A follow-up survey was carried out in 2012, in which 293 patients answered the same questions and their medical records were also reviewed. The baseline results were then compared with those of the follow-up survey. RESULTS: When compared with the baseline survey, the follow-up survey revealed significant differences in the use of validated pain rating instruments as well as the prescription of more appropriate analgesics. Prescription of paracetamol increased significantly in the follow-up survey; 56% of the patients were prescribed paracetamol on a regular basis, compared with 42% at baseline. There was also a significant increase in the use of strong opioids, from 38% at baseline to 55% at follow-up. Prescriptions of weak opioids decreased from 16% at baseline to 4% at follow-up. No significant differences were observed in patient pain levels in the follow-up survey. At baseline, 29% of the patients reported moderate to severe pain at rest (NRS 4-10) and at follow-up that figure was 24% (NRS 4-10). In both surveys, 41% reported moderate to severe pain (NRS 5-10) during movement. Thirty-nine percent reported disturbed sleep at night at both baseline and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that evidence-based guidelines made accessible to all staff as a pocket size booklet and on the intranet, in combination with staff education, pain responsibility nurses who informed other staff on their own wards, improved the prescription of analgesics in the hospitals studied. In order to achieve a noticeable effect for patients, i.e., reduced pain levels, an intervention containing more components than those employed in the present study is required. IMPLICATIONS: Nurses and physicians need greater knowledge about the importance of pain rating. A vital part of pain management at hospitals is continuous evaluation of treatment outcomes to prevent severe pain and disturbed sleep. The complexity of pain and pain management requires commitment, time and knowledge on the part of healthcare staff. Multi-professional pain teams that support ward staff in pain management are necessary in order to reduce suffering and unnecessary pain in hospitalized patients.

Laser-Modified Surface Enhances Osseointegration and Biomechanical Anchorage of Commercially Pure Titanium Implants for Bone-Anchored Hearing Systems.

Osseointegrated implants inserted in the temporal bone are a vital component of bone-anchored hearing systems (BAHS). Despite low implant failure levels, early loading protocols and simplified procedures necessitate the application of implants which promote bone formation, bone bonding and biomechanical stability. Here, screw-shaped, commercially pure titanium implants were selectively laser ablated within the thread valley using an Nd:YAG laser to produce a microtopography with a superimposed nanotexture and a thickened surface oxide layer. State-of-the-art machined implants served as controls. After eight weeks' implantation in rabbit tibiae, resonance frequency analysis (RFA) values increased from insertion to retrieval for both implant types, while removal torque (RTQ) measurements showed 153% higher biomechanical anchorage of the laser-modified implants. Comparably high bone area (BA) and bone-implant contact (BIC) were recorded for both implant types but with distinctly different failure patterns following biomechanical testing. Fracture lines appeared within the bone ~30-50 µm from the laser-modified surface, while separation occurred at the bone-implant interface for the machined surface. Strong correlations were found between RTQ and BIC and between RFA at retrieval and BA. In the endosteal threads, where all the bone had formed de novo, the extracellular matrix composition, the mineralised bone area and osteocyte densities were comparable for the two types of implant. Using resin cast etching, osteocyte canaliculi were observed directly approaching the laser-modified implant surface. Transmission electron microscopy showed canaliculi in close proximity to the laser-modified surface, in addition to a highly ordered arrangement of collagen fibrils aligned parallel to the implant surface contour. It is concluded that the physico-chemical surface properties of laser-modified surfaces (thicker oxide, micro- and nanoscale texture) promote bone bonding which may be of benefit in situations where large demands are imposed on biomechanically stable interfaces, such as in early loading and in compromised conditions.