Can we quickly and thoroughly assess pain with the PACSLAC-II? : a convergent validity study in long-term care residents suffering from dementia.

Abstract : A previous study found that the modified version of the Pain Assessment Checklist for Seniors with Limited Ability to Communicate (PACSLAC-II) is a valid tool to assess pain in elderly individuals suffering from dementia and who are unable to communicate verbally. The primary objective of this study was to confirm the convergent validity of the PACSLAC-II using direct evaluation of long-term care residents in real-life situations, using two other well-validated pain assessment scales (i.e., PACSLAC and Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia [PAINAD]). A secondary objective was to document and compare the time required to complete and score each assessment scale. During two potentially painful procedures (i.e., transfer/mobilization), 46 long-term care residents (mean age = 83 ± 10 years) suffering from dementia were observed by three independent evaluators, each using one of the assessment scales (randomly assigned). Correlational analyses and analysis of variance were used to evaluate the association between each scale and to compare scoring time. The PACSLAC (r = 0.61) and the PAINAD (r = 0.65) were both moderately associated with the PACSLAC-II (all p values < .001). The PAINAD's average scoring time (63 ± 19 seconds) was lower than the PACSLAC-II's (96 ± 2 seconds), which was lower than the PACSLAC's (135 ± 53 seconds) (all p values < .001). These results suggest that the PACSLAC-II is a valid tool for assessing pain in individuals with dementia. The time required to complete and score the PACSLAC-II was reasonable, supporting its usefulness in clinical settings

Patient involvement in medical decision-making and pain among elders: physician or patient-driven?

BACKGROUND: Pain is highly prevalent among older adults, but little is known about how patient involvement in medical decision-making may play a role in limiting its occurrence or severity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether physician-driven and patient-driven participation in decision-making were associated with the odds of frequent and severe pain. METHODS: A cross-sectional population-based survey of 3,135 persons age 65 and older was conducted in the 108-county region comprising West Texas. The survey included self-reports of frequent pain and, among those with frequent pain, the severity of pain. RESULTS: Findings from multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that higher patient-driven participation in decision-making was associated with lower odds (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.75–0.89) of frequent pain, but was not significantly associated with severe pain. Physician-driven participation was not significantly associated with frequent or severe pain. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that patients may need to initiate involvement in medical decision-making to reduce their chances of experiencing frequent pain. Changes to other modifiable health care characteristics, including access to a personal doctor and health insurance coverage, may be more conducive to limiting the risk of severe pain

Validation of Doloplus-2 among nonverbal nursing home patients - an evaluation of Doloplus-2 in a clinical setting

In the present study, more patients were categorized as having pain while using Doloplus-2 compared with nurses' estimation of pain without using any tools. The fact that nurses could not report if the patients were in pain in one third of the patients supports the claim that Doloplus-2 is a useful supplement for estimating pain in this population. However, nurses must use their clinical experience in addition to the use of Doloplus-2, as behaviour can have different meaning for different patients. Further research is still needed about the use of Doloplus-2 in patients not able to self-report their pain.THE WORK (AS DEFINED BELOW) IS PROVIDED UNDER THE TERMS OF THIS BIOMED CENTRAL OPEN ACCESS LICENSE ("LICENSE"). THE WORK IS PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT AND/OR OTHER APPLICABLE LAW. ANY USE OF THE WORK OTHER THAN AS AUTHORIZED UNDER THIS LICENSE IS PROHIBITED.BY EXERCISING ANY RIGHTS TO THE WORK PROVIDED HERE, YOU ACCEPT AND AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE. THE LICENSOR GRANTS YOU THE RIGHTS CONTAINED HERE IN CONSIDERATION OF YOUR ACCEPTANCE OF SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Pain assessment for people with dementia: a systematic review of systematic reviews of pain assessment tools.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence of under-detection and poor management of pain in patients with dementia, in both long-term and acute care. Accurate assessment of pain in people with dementia is challenging and pain assessment tools have received considerable attention over the years, with an increasing number of tools made available. Systematic reviews on the evidence of their validity and utility mostly compare different sets of tools. This review of systematic reviews analyses and summarises evidence concerning the psychometric properties and clinical utility of pain assessment tools in adults with dementia or cognitive impairment. METHODS: We searched for systematic reviews of pain assessment tools providing evidence of reliability, validity and clinical utility. Two reviewers independently assessed each review and extracted data from them, with a third reviewer mediating when consensus was not reached. Analysis of the data was carried out collaboratively. The reviews were synthesised using a narrative synthesis approach. RESULTS: We retrieved 441 potentially eligible reviews, 23 met the criteria for inclusion and 8 provided data for extraction. Each review evaluated between 8 and 13 tools, in aggregate providing evidence on a total of 28 tools. The quality of the reviews varied and the reporting often lacked sufficient methodological detail for quality assessment. The 28 tools appear to have been studied in a variety of settings and with varied types of patients. The reviews identified several methodological limitations across the original studies. The lack of a 'gold standard' significantly hinders the evaluation of tools' validity. Most importantly, the samples were small providing limited evidence for use of any of the tools across settings or populations. CONCLUSIONS: There are a considerable number of pain assessment tools available for use with the elderly cognitive impaired population. However there is limited evidence about their reliability, validity and clinical utility. On the basis of this review no one tool can be recommended given the existing evidence

Developing the practice context to enable more effective pain management with older people: an action research approach

Background\ud \ud This paper, which draws upon an Emancipatory Action Research (EAR) approach, unearths how the complexities of context influence the realities of nursing practice. While the intention of the project was to identify and change factors in the practice context that inhibit effective person-centred pain management practices with older people (65 years or older), reflective critical engagement with the findings identified that enhancing pain management practices with older people was dependent on cultural change in the unit as a whole. \ud \ud Methods\ud \ud An EAR approach was utilised. The project was undertaken in a surgical unit that conducted complex abdominal surgery. Eighty-five percent (n = 48) of nursing staff participated in the two-year project (05/NIR02/107). Data were obtained through the use of facilitated critical reflection with nursing staff. \ud \ud Results\ud \ud Three key themes (psychological safety, leadership, oppression) and four subthemes (power, horizontal violence, distorted perceptions, autonomy) were found to influence the way in which effective nursing practice was realised. Within the theme of 'context,' effective leadership and the creation of a psychologically safe environment were key elements in the enhancement of all aspects of nursing practice. \ud \ud Conclusions\ud \ud Whilst other research has identified the importance of 'practice context' and models and frameworks are emerging to address this issue, the theme of 'psychological safety' has been given little attention in the knowledge translation/implementation literature. Within the principles of EAR, facilitated reflective sessions were found to create 'psychologically safe spaces' that supported practitioners to develop effective person-centred nursing practices in complex clinical environments