Improving pain management in an acute care setting. The Crawford Long Hospital of Emory University experience.
OBJECTIVE
To identify which of three pain intensity measurement scales is most appropriate for use with patients admitted to the inpatient units of the study hospital. The following questions were addressed: Is one of the scales easier for most patients? Is the choice of scales influenced by nursing unit, age, education, race, SES, diagnosis, or type of pain experienced? Do patients perceive that a rating scale helps them describe their pain more effectively?


METHODS
267 patients admitted over a 3-week period completed a four-page questionnaire and demographic form distributed on admission. The primary admitting diagnosis for 39.5% of the sample reflected acute pain, 40.3% chronic pain, and 20.2 no pain.


METHODS
Three pain rating scales were presented: two visual analogues (one contained a 100 mm line; the other contained six faces depicting graduated levels of distress); and a cognitive number rating scale. Each scale used a 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain possible) rating format. Patients completed the questionnaire by rating the intensity of pain experienced using each of the three scales once over the next 24 hours. The last page contained questions related to which of the scales was easiest to use, whether the scale was helpful or needed further explanation, and work and education information. The demographic form was completed from information contained in the patient record.


RESULTS
The scale selected most frequently was the visual analogue containing faces (48.6%), followed by the number (35.3%) and line scales (16.1%). None of the demographic information was found to significantly influence choice of preferred scale. A majority (85.8%) indicated a rating scale as helpful; only 13.6% indicated a need for further explanation. The means for pain intensity ranged from 5.09 to 5.75. The interval between pain ratings for the majority (> 71%) was less than 2 hours. Patients tended to tell the nurse about their pain when the intensity exceeded the midpoint on the scales. A reliability coefficient for the three scales was computed at alpha = 0.88.


CONCLUSIONS
The use of rating scales for pain assessment in adult inpatient units was viewed positively by patients. Recommendations for incorporating self-ratings of pain intensity are set forth. Involving both patients and providers in the process is essential to improving both our processes and the outcomes achieved.
Carey
S J
SJ
Research Division, Crawford Long Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Turpin
C
C
Smith
J
J
Whatley
J
J
Haddox
D
D
D000328:Adult; D006785:Hospitals, University; D006801:Humans; D009730:Nursing Assessment / Q000592:standards*; D010146:Pain / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000451:nursing*; D010147:Pain Measurement / Q000451:nursing / Q000592:standards*; D010865:Pilot Projects; D015203:Reproducibility of Results