Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Professionals underestimate patients' pain: a comprehensive review

View through CrossRef
AbstractPain assessment by patients is the rule in clinical trials but may not be in clinical practice. We examined studies comparing assessment of pain by patients and professionals in clinical practice using published studies (1990-2016; ≥20 patients), in English, in an institutional setting, comparing pain assessment within 24 hours by patients and health care professionals. A difference of at least 10% of the maximum score was considered significant. We judged quality on sampling method, blinding, and study size. Eighty studies (20,496 patients) provided data from a range of settings and locations; most (51%) used unbiased sampling, and most (68%) were blind or probably blind. Nine studies with ≥500 patients involved 58% of patients; 60 with <200 patients involved 25%. Large studies were more likely to use comprehensive or random sampling and blinding of patients and professionals. Underestimation of pain by professionals compared with patients was reported by 62/80 studies (78%); there was no difference in 17 (21%) and overestimation in 1 (1%). Underestimation was reported in 75% of large studies (>500 patients), 91% of mid-sized studies (200-400), and 78% of small studies (<200). High-quality studies (blind, comprehensive, or random sampling, >200 patients) consistently reported underestimation (10/11; 91%). The extent of underestimation tended to increase with pain severity. Professionals consistently tend to underestimate pain compared with assessment by patients. This tendency is more pronounced with more severe pain, and the extent of underestimation can be large. It is likely that this contributes to undertreatment of pain.
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Title: Professionals underestimate patients' pain: a comprehensive review
Description:
AbstractPain assessment by patients is the rule in clinical trials but may not be in clinical practice.
We examined studies comparing assessment of pain by patients and professionals in clinical practice using published studies (1990-2016; ≥20 patients), in English, in an institutional setting, comparing pain assessment within 24 hours by patients and health care professionals.
A difference of at least 10% of the maximum score was considered significant.
We judged quality on sampling method, blinding, and study size.
Eighty studies (20,496 patients) provided data from a range of settings and locations; most (51%) used unbiased sampling, and most (68%) were blind or probably blind.
Nine studies with ≥500 patients involved 58% of patients; 60 with <200 patients involved 25%.
Large studies were more likely to use comprehensive or random sampling and blinding of patients and professionals.
Underestimation of pain by professionals compared with patients was reported by 62/80 studies (78%); there was no difference in 17 (21%) and overestimation in 1 (1%).
Underestimation was reported in 75% of large studies (>500 patients), 91% of mid-sized studies (200-400), and 78% of small studies (<200).
High-quality studies (blind, comprehensive, or random sampling, >200 patients) consistently reported underestimation (10/11; 91%).
The extent of underestimation tended to increase with pain severity.
Professionals consistently tend to underestimate pain compared with assessment by patients.
This tendency is more pronounced with more severe pain, and the extent of underestimation can be large.
It is likely that this contributes to undertreatment of pain.

Related Results

Differential Diagnosis of Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome: A Review
Differential Diagnosis of Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome: A Review
Abstract Thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS) is a complex and often overlooked condition caused by the compression of neurovascular structures as they pass through the thoracic outlet. ...
Chest Wall Hydatid Cysts: A Systematic Review
Chest Wall Hydatid Cysts: A Systematic Review
Abstract Introduction Given the rarity of chest wall hydatid disease, information on this condition is primarily drawn from case reports. Hence, this study systematically reviews t...
Blunt Chest Trauma and Chylothorax: A Systematic Review
Blunt Chest Trauma and Chylothorax: A Systematic Review
Abstract Introduction: Although traumatic chylothorax is predominantly associated with penetrating injuries, instances following blunt trauma, as a rare and challenging condition, ...
Evaluating the Science to Inform the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans Midcourse Report
Evaluating the Science to Inform the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans Midcourse Report
Abstract The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans (Guidelines) advises older adults to be as active as possible. Yet, despite the well documented benefits of physical a...
Presentation and Management of Cervical Thoracic Duct Cyst: A Systematic Review of the Literature
Presentation and Management of Cervical Thoracic Duct Cyst: A Systematic Review of the Literature
Abstract Introduction Thoracic duct cysts are an uncommon phenomenon, especially within the cervical region. Due to its limited reported cases, very little is known about its etiol...
Pain Catastrophizing and Impact on Pelvic Floor Surgery Experience
Pain Catastrophizing and Impact on Pelvic Floor Surgery Experience
ABSTRACT Duration, intensity, and management of pain and discomfort may all be affected by experience, personality, and medical and psychosocial comorbidities. A negative...
Dolor en paratletas: una nueva visión para su gestión
Dolor en paratletas: una nueva visión para su gestión
El presente trabajo se centra en el dolor crónico como uno de los principales problemas de salud que afectan a los paratletas con discapacidad física. El dolor crónico representa u...

Back to Top