Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Initial Pain Management Plans in Response to Severe Pain Indicators on Oncology Clinic Previsit Questionnaires
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Initial Pain Management Plans in Response to Severe Pain Indicators on Oncology Clinic Previsit Questionnaires
Do you wish to request the book?
Initial Pain Management Plans in Response to Severe Pain Indicators on Oncology Clinic Previsit Questionnaires
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Initial Pain Management Plans in Response to Severe Pain Indicators on Oncology Clinic Previsit Questionnaires
2014
Overview
BACKGROUND: The issue of how to address patient pain in the outpatient setting remains challenging. At the London Regional Cancer Program (London, Ontario), patients complete the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) before most visits. OBJECTIVES:To perform a chart review assessing the frequency and, if applicable, the type of a clinical care plan that was developed if a patient indicated pain ≥7 on a 10‐point scale METHODS: The charts of 100 eligible sequential outpatient visits were reviewed and the initial pain management approaches were documented. RESULTS: Between December 2011 and May 2012, visits by 7265 unique patients included 100 eligible visits (pain ≥7 of 10). In 83 cases, active pain management plans, ranging from counselling to hospital admission, were proposed. Active pain management plans were more likely if the cause was believed to be cancer/treatment related: 63 of 65 (96.9%) versus 20 of 35 (57.1%, noncancer/unknown pain cause); P<0.001. There were no differences depending on cancer treatment intent or medical service. CONCLUSIONS: Active pain management plans were documented in 83% of visits. However, patients who reported severe pain that was assessed as benign or unknown in etiology received intervention less frequently, perhaps indicating that oncologists either consider themselves less responsible for noncancer pain, or believe that pain chronicity may lead to a higher ESAS pain score without indicating a need for acute intervention. Further study is needed to determine the subsequent effect of the care plans on patient‐reported ESAS pain scores at future clinic visits. Erratum to “Initial Pain Management Plans in Response to Severe Pain Indicators on Oncology Clinic Previsit Questionnaires” dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/404187
Publisher
Pulsus Group Inc,Wiley
