Nurses' use of the clinically aligned pain assessment tool: A mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of pain in the hospital has often relied on intensity rating alone. To address the gap in meeting patients' pain management expectations, a Midwestern medical center implemented the CAPA (Clinical Aligned Pain Assessment) tool for more comprehensive nursing pain assessments. AIMS: This research described nurses' experience using CAPA on an adult general medicine unit and their documentation of the tool in the electronic health record (EHR) more than 5 years after CAPA implementation. DESIGN: Mixed methods exploratory sequential design. METHODS: A convenience sample of nurses (N = 8) participated in 2 focus groups to describe how they used CAPA, how well it assessed pain, how it determined pain interventions, and the challenges and advantages of using CAPA. Patient EHR data (N = 373) for a 6-month period from the same unit were analyzed to evaluate CAPA documentation. RESULTS: Qualitative themes included: benefits of using CAPA, CAPA leads to a more comprehensive picture, variation in how CAPA is used, and challenges. Quantitative findings demonstrated most frequent documentation in the comfort domain and earlier, though still delayed, reassessment when a higher level of pain was noted. Mixed methods analysis revealed variation in knowledge and practice regarding which domains to document each shift and during reassessment. CONCLUSIONS: As patient advocates, nurses are integral to thorough assessment and treatment of pain. Findings identified the need for methodological research of CAPA. As with any assessment tool, when using CAPA, ongoing monitoring is needed to address how it is administered, coded, and used for decision-making about pain management.

Survey of Nurses' Use of the Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment (CAPA) Tool.

BACKGROUND: Limited research is available on tools for assessing pain and its effect on function in the acute care setting. AIM: This research's purpose is to describe nurses' use of the Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment (CAPA) tool and their beliefs about its utility for assessing pain compared to the numeric rating scale (NRS) in a hospital where CAPA had been used for 6 years. DESIGN: A cross-sectional self-report survey. METHODS: Nurses (N = 110) from 13 adult inpatient units in an academic center participated in this survey describing frequency of CAPA and NRS use, CAPA domains documented, and how nurses asked about pain and distinguished between categories when coding for documentation. Beliefs about the tools' effectiveness were also reported. RESULTS: Most nurses used CAPA routinely for assessments; almost half used the NRS at times. They believed both tools were effective for assessment, but CAPA was more effective to determine what intervention was needed. They also believed patient report using CAPA was more likely to match the nurse's assessment; a majority reported incorporating their observations into CAPA documentation. Most asked the patient about pain without using CAPA words, although many used the specific words. Practice varied in how nurses determined which category to select in the comfort domain and which domains were assessed routinely. CONCLUSIONS: Although many nurses believed CAPA was effective, variation existed in how it was used to assess and document pain, increasing potential for inconsistent assessments and interpretations of pain and pain management.

A scoping review of outcomes of operational success for nurse scientists in clinical practice settings.

BACKGROUND: The nurse scientist in the clinical setting is a role that has evolved over recent decades to encompass the concomitant development of personal research programs and the facilitation of staff and advanced practice nurse research in health care settings. However, the definition, operationalization, and measures of success are extremely variable. PURPOSE: To identify the defining features and characteristics of the nurse scientist role in clinical practice settings as represented in the existing literature. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review using PubMed and CINAHL databases. We initially identified a total of 3345 references from 1976 to June 2020, 217 of which were published from 2005-2020. We used the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) framework to explore the state of the science of the role of nurse scientists in practice settings. DISCUSSION: Approximately 100 articles met the criteria for full-text analysis, and the final review consisted of 20 descriptive analytic studies addressing the nurse scientist role definition, operationalization, and outcome measures. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that nurse scientist roles serve to promote health system success through a host of research-focused activities that conceivably contribute to improved patient care outcomes. Work is needed to support the cost of requisite resources and infrastructure and to increase acceptance of the role as part of a tenure-earning track in academic settings that also stand to benefit.

An official American Thoracic Society/International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation/Society of Critical Care Medicine/Association of Organ and Procurement Organizations/United Network of Organ Sharing Statement: ethical and policy considerations in organ donation after circulatory determination of death.

RATIONALE: Donation after circulatory determination of death (DCDD) has the potential to increase the number of organs available for transplantation. Because consent and management of potential donors must occur before death, DCDD raises unique ethical and policy issues. OBJECTIVES: To develop an ethics and health policy statement on adult and pediatric DCDD relevant to critical care and transplantation stakeholders. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of stakeholders was convened to develop an ethics and health policy statement. The panel consisted of representatives from the American Thoracic Society, Society of Critical Care Medicine, International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation, Association of Organ Procurement Organizations, and the United Network of Organ Sharing. The panel reviewed the literature, discussed important ethics and health policy considerations, and developed a guiding framework for decision making by stakeholders. RESULTS: A framework to guide ethics and health policy statement was established, which addressed the consent process, pre- and post mortem interventions, the determination of death, provisions of end-of-life care, and pediatric DCDD. CONCLUSIONS: The information presented in this Statement is based on the current evidence, experience, and clinical rationale. New clinical research and the development and dissemination of new technologies will eventually necessitate an update of this Statement.

Comparison of health-related quality-of-life outcomes of men and women after coronary artery bypass surgery through 1 year: findings from the POST CABG Biobehavioral Study.

BACKGROUND: Women undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery have a worse medical condition and fewer social and financial resources than men. Some studies have found that women recover less well than men after CABG, whereas others have found women's outcomes comparable to those of men. Past studies of health-related quality of life after CABG have too few women for adequate comparison with men and have not included patients whose data are not available at baseline (eg, emergency CABG), limiting generalizability. METHODS: A longitudinal study of symptoms and health-related quality of life was conducted among patients from four clinical centers enrolling both men (n = 405) and women (n = 269) in the Post CABG Biobehavioral Study in the United States and Canada. RESULTS: After 6 weeks from CABG (average 81 days), both men and women had less anxiety and symptoms related to depression than before surgery (P <.001). After 6 months (average 294 days), both men and women improved in physical and social functioning (P <.001). Although changes in scale scores were similar for men and women at each time point, women scored lower than men on these domains (P <.001, adjusted for baseline medical and sociodemographic differences) and had more symptoms related to depression through 1 year after CABG (P =.003). CONCLUSIONS: Both male and female patients improve in physical, social, and emotional functioning after CABG, and recovery over time is similar in men and women. However, women's health-related quality-of-life scale scores remained less favorable than men's through 1 year after surgery.