IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v23y2014i11-12p1552-1561.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving the systematic approach to pain and sedation management in the ICU by using assessment tools

Author

Listed:
  • Hilde Wøien
  • Henning Værøy
  • Geir Aamodt
  • Ida T Bjørk

Abstract

Aims and objectives To assess the effects of introducing a systematic approach to pain and sedation management in the ICU. Background Identification of ICU patients' analgesic and sedative needs decreases the risk of complications and the hospital length of stay. Several studies have reported a lack of systematic assessment. Design and methods Three assessment tools were implemented in two Norwegian ICUs in a prospective two‐site study (April–July 2009). Frequency of pain and sedation documentation, the number of days when a sedation level was prescribed, and the amount of analgesics and sedatives used were documented for 958 ICU days in 139 mechanically ventilated patients. Fifty‐five ICU nurses completed a questionnaire on the effects of the assessment tools before and after implementation. Results Patients assessed by the tools had a documented pain score 2·5 times daily and a sedation score three times daily. A sedation level was prescribed for 70% of the total patient days. A documented match between prescribed and reported sedation level was achieved for 27% of the days. Combinations of continuous analgesia and sedation were prescribed with wide therapeutic ranges. Significant improvements were seen in the units' assessment and documentation routines scored by the nurses after the implementation of the tools. Conclusion Although the tools were well accepted, they were not used as frequently as recommended. The proportion of missing written prescriptions and documentation of sedation levels most likely reflects the nurses' and physicians' poorly defined intentions for the prescribed treatment. The tools applied helped nurses to focus on significant signs and symptoms. Relevance to clinical practice Without well‐organised pain treatment and sedation, the risk of oversedation is always present. Our results show that the implementation of tools contributes to a systematic approach of the assessment and treatment of pain and sedation in intensive care.

Suggested Citation

  • Hilde Wøien & Henning Værøy & Geir Aamodt & Ida T Bjørk, 2014. "Improving the systematic approach to pain and sedation management in the ICU by using assessment tools," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(11-12), pages 1552-1561, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:23:y:2014:i:11-12:p:1552-1561
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2012.04309.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2012.04309.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2012.04309.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hsiang‐Ling Wang & Yun‐Fang Tsai, 2010. "Nurses’ knowledge and barriers regarding pain management in intensive care units," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(21‐22), pages 3188-3196, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jie Chen & Fen Hu & Jian Yang & Xiao‐Ying Wu & Yi Feng & Yan‐Chun Zhan & You‐Zhong An & Qian Lu & Hai‐Yan Zhang, 2019. "Validation of a Chinese version critical‐care pain observation tool in nonintubated and intubated critically ill patients: Two cross‐sectional studies," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(15-16), pages 2824-2832, August.
    2. Hilde Wøien, 2020. "Movements and trends in intensive care pain treatment and sedation: What matters to the patient?," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(7-8), pages 1129-1140, April.
    3. Reidun K. Sandvik & Brita F. Olsen & Lars‐Jørgen Rygh & Asgjerd Litlere Moi, 2020. "Pain relief from nonpharmacological interventions in the intensive care unit: A scoping review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(9-10), pages 1488-1498, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Oren Asman & Elena Slutsker & Semyon Melnikov, 2019. "Nurses' perceptions of pain management adequacy in mechanically ventilated patients," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(15-16), pages 2946-2952, August.
    2. Esther I. Bernhofer & Jeanne M. Sorrell, 2015. "Nurses Managing Patients’ Pain May Experience Moral Distress," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 24(4), pages 401-414, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:23:y:2014:i:11-12:p:1552-1561. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.