IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v26y2017i23-24p4675-4684.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The clinical applicability of a daily summary of patients’ self‐reported postoperative pain—A repeated measure analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Lotta Wikström
  • Kerstin Eriksson
  • Bengt Fridlund
  • Mats Nilsson
  • Kristofer Årestedt
  • Anders Broström

Abstract

Aim and objectives (i) To determine whether a central tendency, median, based on patients’ self‐rated pain is a clinically applicable daily measure to show patients’ postoperative pain on the first day after major surgery (ii) and to determine the number of self‐ratings required for the calculation of this measure. Background Perioperative pain traits in medical records are difficult to overview. The clinical applicability of a daily documented summarising measure of patients’ self‐rated pain scores is little explored. Design A repeated measure design was carried out at three Swedish country hospitals. Methods Associations between the measures were analysed with nonparametric statistical methods; systematic and individual group changes were analysed separately. Measure I: pain scores at rest and activity postoperative day 1; measure II: retrospective average pain from postoperative day 1. Results The sample consisted of 190 general surgery patients and 289 orthopaedic surgery patients with a mean age of 65; 56% were men. Forty‐four percent had a pre‐operative daily intake of analgesia, and 77% used postoperative opioids. A range of 4‒9 pain scores seem to be eligible for the calculation of the daily measures of pain. Rank correlations for individual median scores, based on four ratings, vs. retrospective self‐rated average pain, were moderate and strengthened with increased numbers of ratings. A systematic group change towards a higher level of reported retrospective pain was significant. Conclusions The median values were clinically applicable daily measures. The risk of obtaining a higher value than was recalled by patients seemed to be low. Applicability increased with increased frequency of self‐rated pain scores and with high‐quality pain assessments. Relevance to clinical practice The documenting of daily median pain scores at rest and during activity could constitute the basis for obtaining patients’ experiences by showing their pain severity trajectories. The measures could also be an important key to predicting postoperative health‐related consequences.

Suggested Citation

  • Lotta Wikström & Kerstin Eriksson & Bengt Fridlund & Mats Nilsson & Kristofer Årestedt & Anders Broström, 2017. "The clinical applicability of a daily summary of patients’ self‐reported postoperative pain—A repeated measure analysis," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(23-24), pages 4675-4684, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:26:y:2017:i:23-24:p:4675-4684
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13818
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13818
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.13818?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. Sandra Braaf & Robin Riley & Elizabeth Manias, 2015. "Failures in communication through documents and documentation across the perioperative pathway," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(13-14), pages 1874-1884, July.
    2. Kerstin Eriksson & Lotta Wikström & Marianne Lindblad‐Fridh & Anders Broström, 2013. "Using mode and maximum values from the Numeric Rating Scale when evaluating postoperative pain management and recovery," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(5-6), pages 638-647, March.
    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. Lotta Wikström & Mats Nilsson & Anders Broström & Kerstin Eriksson, 2019. "Patients’ self‐reported nausea: Validation of the Numerical Rating Scale and of a daily summary of repeated Numerical Rating Scale scores," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5-6), pages 959-968, March.

    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. Lisa Wiyartanti & Choon Hak Lim & Myon Woong Park & Jae Kwan Kim & Gyu Hyun Kwon & Laehyun Kim, 2020. "Resilience in the Surgical Scheduling to Support Adaptive Scheduling System," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Gitte Bunkenborg & Lars Smith‐Hansen & Ingrid Poulsen, 2019. "Implementing mandatory early warning scoring impacts nurses’ practice of documenting free text notes," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(15-16), pages 2990-3000, August.
    3. Åsa Johansson Stark & Andreas Charalambous & Natalja Istomina & Sanna Salanterä & Arun K Sigurdardottir & Panayota Sourtzi & Kirsi Valkeapää & Adelaida Zabalegui & Margareta Bachrach‐Lindström, 2016. "The quality of recovery on discharge from hospital, a comparison between patients undergoing hip and knee replacement – a European study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(17-18), pages 2489-2501, September.
    4. Tiina Syyrilä & Katri Vehviläinen‐Julkunen & Marja Härkänen, 2020. "Communication issues contributing to medication incidents: Mixed‐method analysis of hospitals’ incident reports using indicator phrases based on literature," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(13-14), pages 2466-2481, July.
    5. Susanne Friis Søndergaard & Vibeke Lorentzen & Erik Elgaard Sørensen & Kirsten Frederiksen, 2017. "The documentation practice of perioperative nurses: a literature review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(13-14), pages 1757-1769, July.
    6. Ruth Northway & Stacey Rees & Michelle Davies & Sharon Williams, 2017. "Hospital passports, patient safety and person‐centred care: A review of documents currently used for people with intellectual disabilities in the UK," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(23-24), pages 5160-5168, December.

    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:26:y:2017:i:23-24:p:4675-4684. 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.