Improving satisfaction among established patients in a midwestern pain clinic.

BACKGROUND: A problem in many health care practices is deciding the appropriate appointment length for new and established patients. Patients become frustrated when there is inadequate time to have their needs met, yet when a patient's clinic time is spontaneously lengthened, the provider gets behind in schedule, causing delays and greater frustration for others. AIM: The aims of this evidence based project were to determine whether implementation of a flexible appointment system would improve the current scheduling process in a pain clinic by allowing complex patients the opportunity to schedule a longer clinic appointment and would improve patient satisfaction. DESIGN: This evidence-based practice innovation followed a program evaluation process using a descriptive, existing survey completed by clinic staff and patients. SETTING: A Midwestern pain clinic caring for patients with acute and chronic pain diagnoses. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of 120 patients were surveyed before and after the process change. Thirteen staff members completed the survey on SurveyMonkey pre and post procedural change at the same intervals the patients were surveyed. RESULTS: Patients were more satisfied with the time that they spent in the exam room and the waiting room. The process change improved communication with staff and patients and provided an opportunity to discuss their concerns and health changes prior to their scheduled appointment. CONCLUSION: Allowing an option for flexible scheduling in appointment lengths provided an opportunity to meet patient needs, offer improved service, and improve patient-provider communication.

Opioid guidelines in the management of chronic non-cancer pain.

BACKGROUND: Opioid abuse has increased at an alarming rate. However, available evidence suggests a wide variance in the use of opioids, as documented by different medical specialties, medical boards, advocacy groups, and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). OBJECTIVES: The objective of these opioid guidelines by the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) is to provide guidance for the use of opioids for the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain, to bring consistency in opioid philosophy among the many diverse groups involved, to improve the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain, and to reduce the incidence of drug diversion. DESIGN: A policy committee evaluated a systematic review of the available literature regarding opioid use in managing chronic non-cancer pain. This resulted in the formulation of the essentials of guidelines, a series of potential evidence linkages representing conclusions, followed by statements regarding relationships between clinical interventions and outcomes. METHODS: Consistent with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) hierarchical and comprehensive standards, the elements of the guideline preparation process included literature searches, literature synthesis, systematic review, consensus evaluation, open forum presentations, formal endorsement by the Board of Directors of the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP), and blinded peer review. Evidence was designated based on scientific merit as Level I (conclusive), Level II (strong), Level III (moderate), Level IV (limited), or Level V (indeterminate). RESULTS: After an extensive review and analysis of the literature, the authors utilized two systematic reviews, two narrative reviews, 32 studies included in prior systematic reviews, and 10 additional studies in the synthesis of evidence. The evidence was limited. CONCLUSION: These guidelines evaluated the evidence for the use of opioids in the management of chronic non-cancer pain and recommendations for management. These guidelines are based on the best available scientific evidence and do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. Because of the changing body of evidence, this document is not intended to be a "standard of care."