Pain management interventions with parents in the emergency department: a randomized trial.

AIM: This paper is a report of the efficacy of a parental educational intervention on children's pain intensity and experience of pain-related unpleasantness at 24 hours post-discharge from the emergency department, and on parents' beliefs about pain. BACKGROUND: Parents' misbeliefs about pain management may inhibit them from managing their child's pain appropriately. Educating parents about pain management may increase their knowledge, dispel myths and help decrease children's pain intensity and unpleasantness related to pain following a visit to an emergency department. METHOD: A randomized design was adopted with samples of parent/child dyads. The experimental group received a bookmark, booklet on pain management and pain scale. The control group only received a pain scale. Pain intensity and unpleasantness were measured at triage and 24 hours after discharge from the emergency department. Parents' beliefs were measured with the Pain Belief Questionnaire. Data were collected from November 2005 to May 2006. RESULTS: Samples of 98 (experimental) and 97 (control) children/parents were recruited. No statistically significant differences were found between both groups regarding pain intensity and unpleasantness, at triage and 24 hours post-discharge. Results for the Pain Belief Questionnaire were similar between the groups (t = 1·751, P = 0·082). CONCLUSION: The interventions were not effective to reduce pain and unpleasantness related to pain, as well as to improve pain beliefs of parents. Other interventions, such as having parents participate actively in their child's pain management, might be more effective than a passive educational intervention.

Pain Management Practices in a Pediatric Emergency Room (PAMPER) Study: interventions with nurses.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Children's pain in emergency departments (EDs) is poorly managed by nurses, despite evidence that pain is one of the most commonly presenting complaints of children attending the ED. Our objectives were 2-fold: to verify if tailored educational interventions with emergency pediatric nurses would improve nurses' knowledge of pain management and nurses' pain management practices (documentation of pain, administration of analgesics, nonpharmacological interventions). METHODS: This intervention study with a pre-post design (baseline, immediately after the intervention [T-2], and 6 months after intervention [T-3]) used a sample of nurses (N = 50) and retrospective chart reviews of children (N = 450; 150 charts reviewed each at baseline, T-2, and T-3) who presented themselves in the ED with a diagnosis known to generate moderate to severe pain (burns, acute abdominal pain, deep lacerations, fracture, sprain). Principal outcomes: nurses' knowledge of pain management (Pediatric Nurses Knowledge and Attitudes Survey [PNKAS] on pain) and nurses' clinical practices of pain management (Pain Management Experience Evaluation [PMEE]). RESULTS: Response rate on the PNKAS was 84% (42/50) at baseline and 50% (21/42) at T-2. Mean scores on PNKAS were 28.2 (SD, 4.9; max, 42.0) at baseline and 31.0 (SD, 4.6) at T-2. Results from paired t test showed significant difference between both times (t = -3.129, P = 0.005). Nurses who participated in the capsules improved their documentation of pain from baseline (59.3%) to T-2 (80.8%; chi = 12.993, P < 0.001) as well as from baseline (59.3%) to T-3 (89.1%; chi = 29.436, P < 0.001). In addition, nurses increased their nonpharmacological interventions from baseline (16.7%) to T-3 (31.9%; chi = 8.623, P = 0.003). Finally, we obtained significant differences on pain documentation between the group of nurses who attended at least 1 capsule and the group of nurses who did not attend any capsule at both times (T-2 and T-3; chi = 20.424, P < 0.001; chi = 33.333, P < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The interventions contributed to the improvement of the nurses' knowledge of pain management and some of the practices over time. We believe that an intervention tailored to nurses' needs and schedule has more impact than just passive diffusion of educational content.

The Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure: a valid clinical score for assessing acute asthma severity from toddlers to teenagers.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the performance characteristics of the Preschool Respiratory Assessment Measure (PRAM) in preschool and school-aged children with acute asthma. STUDY DESIGN: In a prospective cohort study, we examined the validity, responsiveness, and reliability of the PRAM in children aged 2 to 17 years with acute asthma. The study involved more than 100 nurses and physicians who recorded the PRAM on triage, after initial bronchodilation, and at disposition. Predictive validity and responsiveness were examined using disposition as outcome. RESULTS: The PRAM was recorded in 81% (n = 782) of patients at triage. The PRAM at triage and after initial bronchodilation showed a strong association with admission (r = 0.4 and 0.5, respectively; P < .0001), thus supporting its ability to distinguish across severity levels. The responsiveness coefficient of 0.7 indicated good ability to identify change after bronchodilation. The PRAM showed good internal consistency (Cronbach alpha = 0.71) and inter-rater reliability (r = 0.78) for all patients and across all age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Good performance characteristics were observed in all age groups, making the PRAM an attractive score for assessing asthma severity and response to treatment.

Implementation of a Pediatric Emergency Triage System in Xiamen, China.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric emergency rooms (PERs) in Chinese hospitals are perpetually full of sick and injured children because of the lack of sufficiently developed community hospitals and low access to family physicians. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical value of a new five-level Chinese pediatric emergency triage system (CPETS), modeled after the Canadian Triage System and Acuity Scale. METHODS: In this study, we compared CPETS outcomes in our PER relative to those of the prior two-level system. Patients who visited our PER before (January 2013-June 2013) and after (January 2014-June 2014) the CPETS was implemented served as the control and experimental group, respectively. Patient flow, triage rates, triage accuracy, wait times (overall and for severe patients), and patient/family satisfaction were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Relative to the performance of the former system experienced by the control group, the CPETS experienced by the experimental group was associated with a reduced patient flow through the PER (Cox-Stuart test, t = 0, P < 0.05), a higher triage rate (93.40% vs. 90.75%; χ2 = 801.546, P < 0.001), better triage accuracy (96.32% vs. 85.09%; χ2 = 710.904, P < 0.001), shorter overall wait times (37.30 ± 13.80 min vs. 41.60 ± 15.40 min; t = 11.27, P < 0.001), markedly shorter wait times for severe patients (2.07 [0.65, 4.11] min vs. 3.23 [1.90,4.36] min; z = -2.057, P = 0.040), and higher family satisfaction rates (94.23% vs. 92.21%; χ2 = 321.528, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing the CPETS improved nurses' abilities to triage severe patients and, thus, to deliver the urgent treatments more quickly. The system shunted nonurgent patients to outpatient care effectively, resulting in improved efficiency of PER health-care delivery.