↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

An innovative nonpharmacological intervention combined with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia increased patient global improvement in pain and satisfaction after major surgery

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
An innovative nonpharmacological intervention combined with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia increased patient global improvement in pain and satisfaction after major surgery
Published in
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, April 2017
DOI 10.2147/ndt.s131517
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chia-Chun Chuang, Chien-Ching Lee, Li-Kai Wang, Bor-Shyh Lin, Wen-Ju Wu, Chung-Han Ho, Jen-Yin Chen

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate whether a nonpharmacological approach through implementation of a communication improvement program (named CICARE for Connect, Introduce, Communicate, Ask, Respond and Exit) into standard operating procedure (SOP) in acute pain service (APS) improved satisfaction in patients receiving intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA). This was a nonrandomized before-after study. Adult patients (aged between 20 and 80 years) who received IV-PCA after major surgery were included. Implementing CICARE into SOP was conducted in APS. Anonymous questionnaires were used to measure outcomes in this prospective two-part survey. The first part completed by APS nurses contained patients' characteristics, morphine dosage, delivery/demand ratios, IV-PCA side effects and pain at rest measured with an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS, 0-10). A score of NRS ≥4 was defined as inadequately treated pain. The ten-question second part was completed by patients voluntarily after IV-PCA was discontinued. Each question was assessed with a 5-point Likert scale (1: extremely poor; 5: excellent). Patients were separated into "before" and "after" CICARE groups. Primary outcomes were patient global impression of improvement in pain (PGI-Improvement) and patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included quality of communication skills, instrument proficiency and accessibility/availability of IV-PCA. The response rate was 55.3%, with 187 usable questionnaires. CICARE effectively improved patient global impression of improvement in pain, patient satisfaction, communication skills and accessibility/availability of IV-PCA. No significant differences were noted in instrument proficiency, morphine dosage, delivery/demand ratios, rates of inadequately treated pain at rest and side effects of IV-PCA between groups. Paradoxical findings were noted between the rates of inadequately treated pain/side effects and PGI-Improvement in pain/patient satisfaction, which were affected by psychological factors. Nonpharmacological interventions carried out by implementing CICARE into SOP for APS effectively improved patient satisfaction and postoperative pain management quality, but this did not affect actual pain.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Lecturer 2 6%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 7 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 25%
Psychology 4 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 7 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 April 2017.
All research outputs
#12,842,639
of 14,537,474 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#2,002
of 2,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,897
of 265,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#67
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,537,474 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,487 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,240 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.