• Exploratory cross-sectional study of factors associated with pre-hospital management of pain

      Siriwardena, Aloysius; Shaw, Deborah; Bouliotis, George (2010-12)
    • Investigation of patient and practitioner views on improving pain management in the prehospital settings

      Iqbal, Mohammad; Spaight, Anne; Siriwardena, Aloysius; Shaw, Deborah (2011-03)
      Background Pre-hospital pain management is increasingly important with most patients (80%) presenting to UK ambulance services in pain. Around 20% of patients want more pain relief and 5% feel that ambulance crews do not adequately treat pain. A recent study in the East Midlands showed that 85.1% of AMI patients and 75% of fracture patients had a pain score but fewer than a quarter of patients assessed for and experiencing pain with either condition received opiates. Improving the pathway of prehospital pain management is therefore important and a key indicator of the quality of service. Objective We gathered data on perspectives of pain management from patients, ambulance and accident and emergency (A&E) care staff in Lincolnshire. Method Qualitative data were gathered through focus group (5) and interviews (28). Participants were purposively sampled from patients recently transported to hospital with pain, ambulance staff and A&E clinicians. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed. Data were manipulated using MAXQDA and thematic analysis used iteratively to develop themes. Results Themes emerging from the data included: (a) expectations and beliefs (b) assessment methods (c) drug treatment (d) non-drug treatment and (e) improvement strategies for pain. Patients and staff expected pain to be relieved in the ambulance; instances of refusal or inadequate analgesia were not uncommon. Pain was commonly assessed using a verbal pain score; clinical observation was also used which sometimes led to discordance between subjective experience and clinical assessment. Morphine, Entonox and oxygen were commonly used to treat pain. Reassurance, positioning and immobilisation were alternatives to drugs. Suggestions to improve prehospital pain management included addressing barriers, modifying the available drugs and developing a prehospital pain management protocol supported by training for staff. Conclusion The findings will be used to develop an educational intervention for better pain assessment and management in the prehospital setting. https://emj.bmj.com/content/emermed/28/3/e1.12.full.pdf This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emj.2010.108605.2
    • Non-randomised control study of the effectiveness of a novel pain assessment tool for use by paramedics

      Iqbal, Mohammad; Spaight, P. Anne; Kane, Ros; Asghar, Zahid; Siriwardena, Aloysius (2016-09)
      Background Eighty percent of patients presenting to ambulance services present with pain. Pain is sometimes inadequately assessed and treated. Effective pain management can improve patient outcomes and experience. Previous qualitative research suggested that numerical verbal pain scores, usually used to assess pain in the ambulance setting, were poorly understood. We developed a new tool, the ‘Patient Reported Outcome Measure for Pain Treatment’ (PROMPT), to address this need. Initial testing showed that PROMPT had reliability and (face, content and predictive) validity. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of PROMPT. Methods We used a non-randomised control group design in adult patients with chest pain or injury treated by intervention paramedics using PROMPT compared with control paramedics following usual practice for pain outcomes (reduction in pain score, use of analgesia). Routine data from electronic patient records were used to measure outcomes. We collected baseline rates of outcomes in patients treated by intervention and control paramedics, in a seven month period one year previously, to adjust for secular trends. The study was conducted in East Midlands Ambulance Service. We used regression analysis to compare groups for differences in pain score change and use of analgesics correcting for baseline rates and demographic differences. Results Twenty-five intervention paramedics used PROMPT (of 35 who were trained in its use) treating 300 patients over a seven month period. Data for these and 848 patients treated by 106 control paramedics were entered into SPSS and STATA12 for analysis. Mean reductions in pain score ( p<0.001) and use of analgesics was significantly greater (p<0.001) in patients managed by paramedics using PROMPT compared with those receiving usual care after adjusting for patient age, sex, clinical condition and baseline rates. Conclusion Use of the PROMPT resulted in greater reductions in pain score and increased use of analgesics compared with usual care. https://emj.bmj.com/content/emermed/33/9/e1.3.full.pdf This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2016-206139.7
    • Patients' and emergency clinicians' perceptions of improving pre-hospital pain management: a qualitative study

      Iqbal, Mohammad; Spaight, Peggy Anne; Siriwardena, Aloysius (2013-03)
      Background The authors aimed to investigate patients’ and practitioners’ views and experiences of pre-hospital pain management to inform improvements in care and a patient-centred approach to treatment. Methods This was a qualitative study involving a single emergency medical system. Data were gathered through focus groups and semi-structured interviews. Participants were purposively sampled from patients transported by ambulance to hospital with a painful condition during the past 6 months, ambulance service and emergency department (ED) clinicians. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and thematic analysis was conducted. Results 55 participants were interviewed: 17 patients, 25 ambulance clinicians and 13 ED clinicians. Key themes included: (1) consider beliefs of patients and staff in pain management; (2) widen pain assessment strategies; (3) optimise non-drug treatment; (4) increase drug treatment options; and (5) enhance communication and coordination along the pre-hospital pain management pathway. Patients and staff expected pain to be relieved in the ambulance; however, refusal of or inadequate analgesia were common. Pain was commonly assessed using a verbal score, but practitioners’ views of severity were sometimes discordant with this. Morphine and Entonox were commonly used to treat pain. Reassurance, positioning and immobilisation were used as alternatives to drugs. Pre-hospital pain management could be improved by addressing practitioner and patient barriers, increasing available drugs and developing multi-organisational pain management protocols supported by training for staff. Conclusions Pain is often poorly managed and undertreated in the pre-hospital environment. The authors’ findings may be used to inform guidance, education and policy to improve the pre-hospital pain management pathway. https://emj.bmj.com/content/emermed/30/3/e18.full.pdf This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2012-201111