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.

Pediatric Critical Care Nurses' Practices Related to Sedation and Analgesia.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) nurses may consider additional factors beyond validated tools when managing pain and sedation of children. However, these other factors and related beliefs, practices, and decision-making for analgesia and sedation have not been well described. OBJECTIVES: This study describes nurses' beliefs, practices, and decision-making related to sedation and analgesia for mechanically ventilated children on a PICU and a pediatric cardiovascular ICU at a tertiary academic children's medical center in the United States. METHODS: A 35-item web-based survey tool was developed to more fully identify nurses' pain, sedation, comfort, and analgesia beliefs, decisions, planning, and procedures for children who were mechanically ventilated in the ICU. It was distributed to 102 nurses in the PICU, pediatric cardiovascular ICU, and pediatric critical care float pool. RESULTS: Twenty-six nurses (25%) responded; a majority worked the night shift and had 5 years or less of ICU experience. While participants believed intubated pediatric patients required moderate to deep sedation, approximately only half reported patients were adequately sedated. They reported that they were more likely to manage pain and sedation using specific behaviors and changes in vital signs than scores on a standardized scale. Nurses also reported routinely incorporating nonpharmacologic comfort measures. Premedication was more common for invasive procedures than for routine nursing care. DISCUSSION: Pediatric ICU nurses in this study considered factors beyond standardized scales when evaluating and managing pain and sedation of ventilated children. Nurses prioritized children's specific behaviors, vital signs, and their own nursing judgment above standardized scales. Research is needed to describe nurses' practices beyond this small study and to define and validate additional assessment parameters to incorporate into decision-making to improve management and care outcomes.

Prevalence of ICU Delirium in Postoperative Pediatric Cardiac Surgery Patients.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of ICU delirium in children less than 18 years old that underwent cardiac surgery within the last 30 days. The secondary aim of the study was to identify risk factors associated with ICU delirium in postoperative pediatric cardiac surgical patients. DESIGN: A 1-day, multicenter point-prevalence study of delirium in pediatric postoperative cardiac surgery patients. SETTING: Twenty-seven pediatric cardiac and general critical care units caring for postoperative pediatric cardiac surgery patients in North America. PATIENTS: All children less than 18 years old hospitalized in the cardiac critical care units at 06:00 on a randomly selected, study day. INTERVENTIONS: Eligible children were screened for delirium using the Cornell Assessment of Pediatric Delirium by the study team in collaboration with the bedside nurse. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: Overall, 181 patients were enrolled and 40% (n = 73) screened positive for delirium. There were no statistically significant differences in patient demographic information, severity of defect or surgical procedure, past medical history, or postoperative day between patients screening positive or negative for delirium. Our bivariate analysis found those patients screening positive had a longer duration of mechanical ventilation (12.8 vs 5.1 d; p = 0.02); required more vasoactive support (55% vs 26%; p = 0.0009); and had a higher number of invasive catheters (4 vs 3 catheters; p = 0.001). Delirium-positive patients received more total opioid exposure (1.80 vs 0.36 mg/kg/d of morphine equivalents; p < 0.001), did not have an ambulation or physical therapy schedule (p = 0.02), had not been out of bed in the previous 24 hours (p < 0.0002), and parents were not at the bedside at time of data collection (p = 0.008). In the mixed-effects logistic regression analysis of modifiable risk factors, the following variables were associated with a positive delirium screen: 1) pain score, per point increase (odds ratio, 1.3; 1.06-1.60); 2) total opioid exposure, per mg/kg/d increase (odds ratio, 1.35; 1.06-1.73); 3) SBS less than 0 (odds ratio, 4.01; 1.21-13.27); 4) pain medication or sedative administered in the previous 4 hours (odds ratio, 3.49; 1.32-9.28); 5) no progressive physical therapy or ambulation schedule in their medical record (odds ratio, 4.40; 1.41-13.68); and 6) parents not at bedside at time of data collection (odds ratio, 2.31; 1.01-5.31). CONCLUSIONS: We found delirium to be a common problem after cardiac surgery with several important modifiable risk factors.

Family Stress in Pediatric Critical Care.

This mixed methods study explored stress in families whose children were hospitalized in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) for more than one week. The study aim was to describe sources of stress for families whose children require extended hospitalization in the PICU. Data collection included semi-structured interviews and completion of the Family Inventory of Life Events and Family System Stressor Strength Inventory. Themes reported in this paper are separation, not knowing, and the child's illness and distress. Additional research is needed to validate these findings in families of other cultures and structures, and in other PICUs.