This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Save to my personal folders Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Rhodes, D. J. Articles by Grossman, S. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Rhodes, D. J. Articles by Grossman, S. A. Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

Feasibility of Quantitative Pain Assessment in Outpatient Oncology Practice

From the Johns Hopkins Hospital and St Agnes Hospital, Baltimore, MD.

Address reprint requests to Deborah J Rhodes, MD, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905; email rhodes.deborah@ mayo.edu.

PURPOSE: Although physicians view failure to assess pain systematically as the most important barrier to outpatient cancer pain management, little is known about pain assessment in this setting. We sought to determine whether pain is routinely assessed and whether routine quantitative pain assessment is feasible in a busy outpatient oncology practice.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a pre- and postintervention chart review of 520 randomly selected medical and radiation oncology patient visits at a community hospital-based private outpatient practice. The intervention consisted of training health assistants (HAs) to measure and document patient pain scores by using a visual analog scale. The main outcome measures included HA documentation of patient pain scores, quantitative and qualitative mention of pain in the physician note, and analgesic treatment before and after the intervention.

RESULTS: After the intervention, HA documentation of pain scores increased from 1% to 75.6% (P < .0001). Physician documentation increased from 0% to 4.8% for quantitative documentation (P < .01), and from 60.0% to 68.3% for qualitative documentation (not significant). Of all the patients, 23.1% reported significant pain. Subgroups with greater pain included patients actively receiving radiation treatments and patients with lung cancer. Of patients with signifi-cant pain, 28.2% had no mention of pain in the physician note and 47.9% had no documented analgesic treatment.

CONCLUSION: Quantitative pain assessment was virtually absent before our intervention but easily implemented and sustained in a busy outpatient oncology practice. Pain score collection identified a high prevalence of pain, patient subgroups at risk for pain, and a significant proportion of patients with pain that was neither evaluated nor treated by their oncologists.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. Kusajima, M. Kawa, M. Miyashita, K. Kazuma, and T. Okabe Prospective Evaluation of Transition to Specialized Home Palliative Care in Japan American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, June 1, 2009; 26(3): 172 - 179. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. M. Dy, S. M. Asch, A. Naeim, H. Sanati, A. Walling, and K. A. Lorenz Evidence-Based Standards for Cancer Pain Management J. Clin. Oncol., August 10, 2008; 26(23): 3879 - 3885. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. K. McNiff, M. N. Neuss, J. O. Jacobson, P. D. Eisenberg, P. Kadlubek, and J. V. Simone Measuring Supportive Care in Medical Oncology Practice: Lessons Learned From the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative J. Clin. Oncol., August 10, 2008; 26(23): 3832 - 3837. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Martoni, C Degli Esposti, A Cricca, G Rocchi, and S Giaquinta Twice-daily pain monitoring as standard clinical practice for inpatients at a medical oncology unit: a descriptive study Ann. Onc., January 1, 2007; 18(1): 158 - 162. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]