Studying protocol-based pain management in the emergency department

Akkamahadevi Patil, Madhu Srinivasarangan, Prithvishree Ravindra, Harshit Mundada

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Majority of the patients presenting to emergency department (ED) have pain. ED oligoanalgesia remains a challenge. Aims: This study aims to study the effect of implementing a protocol-based pain management in the ED on (1) time to analgesia and (2) adequacy of analgesia obtained. Settings and Design: Cross-sectional study in the ED. Methods: Patients aged 18-65 years of age with pain of numeric rating scale (NRS) ≥4 were included. A series of 100 patients presenting before introduction of the protocol-based pain management were grouped 'pre-protocol,' and managed as per existing practice. Following this, a protocol for management of all patients presenting to ED with pain was implemented. Another series of 100 were grouped as 'post-protocol' and managed as per the new pain management protocol. The data of patients from both the groups were collected and analyzed. Statistical Analysis Used: Descriptive statistical tests such as percentage, mean and standard deviation and inferential statistical tests such as Pearson coefficient, Student's t-test were applied. Differences were interpreted as significant when P < 0.05. Results: Mean time to administer analgesic was significantly lesser in the postprotocol group (preprotocol 20.30 min vs. postprotocol 13.05 min; P < 0.001). There was significant difference in the pain relief achieved (change in NRS) between the two groups, with greater pain relief achieved in the postprotocol group (preprotocol group 4.6800 vs. postprotocol group 5.3600; P < 0.001). Patients' rating of pain relief (assessed on E5 scale) was significantly higher in the postprotocol group (preprotocol 3.91 vs. postprotocol 4.27; P = 0.001). Patients' satisfaction (North American Spine Society scale) with the overall treatment was also compared and found to be significantly higher in postprotocol group (mean: preprotocol 1.59 vs. postprotocol 1.39; P = 0.008). Conclusion: Protocol-based pain management provided timely and superior pain relief.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)180-188
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Emergencies, Trauma and Shock
Volume10
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-10-2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Pain Management
Hospital Emergency Service
Pain
Analgesia
Patient Satisfaction
Analgesics
Cross-Sectional Studies
Students

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Emergency Medicine

Cite this

Patil, Akkamahadevi ; Srinivasarangan, Madhu ; Ravindra, Prithvishree ; Mundada, Harshit. / Studying protocol-based pain management in the emergency department. In: Journal of Emergencies, Trauma and Shock. 2017 ; Vol. 10, No. 4. pp. 180-188.
@article{b495d33d5f43472d8b6e4ce5e1dd6058,
title = "Studying protocol-based pain management in the emergency department",
abstract = "Background: Majority of the patients presenting to emergency department (ED) have pain. ED oligoanalgesia remains a challenge. Aims: This study aims to study the effect of implementing a protocol-based pain management in the ED on (1) time to analgesia and (2) adequacy of analgesia obtained. Settings and Design: Cross-sectional study in the ED. Methods: Patients aged 18-65 years of age with pain of numeric rating scale (NRS) ≥4 were included. A series of 100 patients presenting before introduction of the protocol-based pain management were grouped 'pre-protocol,' and managed as per existing practice. Following this, a protocol for management of all patients presenting to ED with pain was implemented. Another series of 100 were grouped as 'post-protocol' and managed as per the new pain management protocol. The data of patients from both the groups were collected and analyzed. Statistical Analysis Used: Descriptive statistical tests such as percentage, mean and standard deviation and inferential statistical tests such as Pearson coefficient, Student's t-test were applied. Differences were interpreted as significant when P < 0.05. Results: Mean time to administer analgesic was significantly lesser in the postprotocol group (preprotocol 20.30 min vs. postprotocol 13.05 min; P < 0.001). There was significant difference in the pain relief achieved (change in NRS) between the two groups, with greater pain relief achieved in the postprotocol group (preprotocol group 4.6800 vs. postprotocol group 5.3600; P < 0.001). Patients' rating of pain relief (assessed on E5 scale) was significantly higher in the postprotocol group (preprotocol 3.91 vs. postprotocol 4.27; P = 0.001). Patients' satisfaction (North American Spine Society scale) with the overall treatment was also compared and found to be significantly higher in postprotocol group (mean: preprotocol 1.59 vs. postprotocol 1.39; P = 0.008). Conclusion: Protocol-based pain management provided timely and superior pain relief.",
author = "Akkamahadevi Patil and Madhu Srinivasarangan and Prithvishree Ravindra and Harshit Mundada",
year = "2017",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.4103/JETS.JETS_83_16",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
pages = "180--188",
journal = "Journal of Emergencies, Trauma and Shock",
issn = "0974-2700",
publisher = "Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd",
number = "4",

}

Studying protocol-based pain management in the emergency department. / Patil, Akkamahadevi; Srinivasarangan, Madhu; Ravindra, Prithvishree; Mundada, Harshit.

In: Journal of Emergencies, Trauma and Shock, Vol. 10, No. 4, 01.10.2017, p. 180-188.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Studying protocol-based pain management in the emergency department

AU - Patil, Akkamahadevi

AU - Srinivasarangan, Madhu

AU - Ravindra, Prithvishree

AU - Mundada, Harshit

PY - 2017/10/1

Y1 - 2017/10/1

N2 - Background: Majority of the patients presenting to emergency department (ED) have pain. ED oligoanalgesia remains a challenge. Aims: This study aims to study the effect of implementing a protocol-based pain management in the ED on (1) time to analgesia and (2) adequacy of analgesia obtained. Settings and Design: Cross-sectional study in the ED. Methods: Patients aged 18-65 years of age with pain of numeric rating scale (NRS) ≥4 were included. A series of 100 patients presenting before introduction of the protocol-based pain management were grouped 'pre-protocol,' and managed as per existing practice. Following this, a protocol for management of all patients presenting to ED with pain was implemented. Another series of 100 were grouped as 'post-protocol' and managed as per the new pain management protocol. The data of patients from both the groups were collected and analyzed. Statistical Analysis Used: Descriptive statistical tests such as percentage, mean and standard deviation and inferential statistical tests such as Pearson coefficient, Student's t-test were applied. Differences were interpreted as significant when P < 0.05. Results: Mean time to administer analgesic was significantly lesser in the postprotocol group (preprotocol 20.30 min vs. postprotocol 13.05 min; P < 0.001). There was significant difference in the pain relief achieved (change in NRS) between the two groups, with greater pain relief achieved in the postprotocol group (preprotocol group 4.6800 vs. postprotocol group 5.3600; P < 0.001). Patients' rating of pain relief (assessed on E5 scale) was significantly higher in the postprotocol group (preprotocol 3.91 vs. postprotocol 4.27; P = 0.001). Patients' satisfaction (North American Spine Society scale) with the overall treatment was also compared and found to be significantly higher in postprotocol group (mean: preprotocol 1.59 vs. postprotocol 1.39; P = 0.008). Conclusion: Protocol-based pain management provided timely and superior pain relief.

AB - Background: Majority of the patients presenting to emergency department (ED) have pain. ED oligoanalgesia remains a challenge. Aims: This study aims to study the effect of implementing a protocol-based pain management in the ED on (1) time to analgesia and (2) adequacy of analgesia obtained. Settings and Design: Cross-sectional study in the ED. Methods: Patients aged 18-65 years of age with pain of numeric rating scale (NRS) ≥4 were included. A series of 100 patients presenting before introduction of the protocol-based pain management were grouped 'pre-protocol,' and managed as per existing practice. Following this, a protocol for management of all patients presenting to ED with pain was implemented. Another series of 100 were grouped as 'post-protocol' and managed as per the new pain management protocol. The data of patients from both the groups were collected and analyzed. Statistical Analysis Used: Descriptive statistical tests such as percentage, mean and standard deviation and inferential statistical tests such as Pearson coefficient, Student's t-test were applied. Differences were interpreted as significant when P < 0.05. Results: Mean time to administer analgesic was significantly lesser in the postprotocol group (preprotocol 20.30 min vs. postprotocol 13.05 min; P < 0.001). There was significant difference in the pain relief achieved (change in NRS) between the two groups, with greater pain relief achieved in the postprotocol group (preprotocol group 4.6800 vs. postprotocol group 5.3600; P < 0.001). Patients' rating of pain relief (assessed on E5 scale) was significantly higher in the postprotocol group (preprotocol 3.91 vs. postprotocol 4.27; P = 0.001). Patients' satisfaction (North American Spine Society scale) with the overall treatment was also compared and found to be significantly higher in postprotocol group (mean: preprotocol 1.59 vs. postprotocol 1.39; P = 0.008). Conclusion: Protocol-based pain management provided timely and superior pain relief.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85032356070&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85032356070&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4103/JETS.JETS_83_16

DO - 10.4103/JETS.JETS_83_16

M3 - Article

VL - 10

SP - 180

EP - 188

JO - Journal of Emergencies, Trauma and Shock

JF - Journal of Emergencies, Trauma and Shock

SN - 0974-2700

IS - 4

ER -