Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T00:51:27.652Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What pain scales do nurses use in the postanaesthesia care unit?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2005

F. Aubrun ,
X. Paqueron ,
O. Langeron ,
P. Coriat  and
B Riou
F. Aubrun
Affiliation:
Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Département d'Anesthésie-Réanimation chirurgicale, Paris, France
X. Paqueron
Affiliation:
Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Département d'Anesthésie-Réanimation chirurgicale, Paris, France
O. Langeron
Affiliation:
Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Département d'Anesthésie-Réanimation chirurgicale, Paris, France
P. Coriat
Affiliation:
Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Département d'Anesthésie-Réanimation chirurgicale, Paris, France
B Riou
Affiliation:
Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Service d'Accueil des Urgences, Groupe hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
Get access

Extract

Summary

Background and objective: The visual analogue scale (VAS) is considered as the gold standard method for postoperative pain assessment. Nevertheless, in some clinical situations, this method may not be reliable. We performed an observational study to assess the use of the VAS and other pain scales by nurses in the postanaesthesia care unit.

Methods: We studied the reasons for not using the VAS and asked if it may be less appropriate in certain age groups.

Results: Among 600 patients included in the study (16% = 70 yr), nurses used the VAS in 53%, the numerical rating scale in 30%, the verbal rating scale in 12% and the behavioural scale in 5%. In 43% of the assessments, nursed did not use the VAS; the most frequently cited reason was related to their preference for other methods. In 54% of the assessments, the reason for not using the VAS was related to the patients, mainly when they were in too much pain to use it (22%). When the patient was in too much pain, the numerical rating scale was chosen in 54% and the behavioural scale in 27%. There was no difference between young patients and elderly patients.

Conclusions: Although the VAS is the standard method to assess pain, the nurses preferred using the numerical rating scale, both spontaneously or when VAS assessment was not possible.

Keywords

NEUROLOGICAL EXAMINATION, pain measurementPERIOPERATIVE NURSING, postanaesthesia nursingSENSATION, pain
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 20 , Issue 9 , September 2003 , pp. 745 - 749
Copyright
© 2003 European Society of Anaesthesiology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Feeley TW. The postanesthesia care unit. In: Miller RD, ed. Anesthesia, 3rd edn. New York, USA: Churchill Livingstone, 1990: vol. 3, 2113–2133.
Aubrun F, Monsel S, Langeron O, Coriat P, Riou B. Postoperative titration of intravenous morphine. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2001; 18: 159–165.Google Scholar
Jensen MP, Karoly P, Braver S. The measurement of clinical pain intensity: a comparison of six methods. Pain 1986; 27: 117–126.Google Scholar
Zalon ML. Nurses' assessment of postoperative patients' pain. Pain 1993; 54: 329–334.Google Scholar
Huskisson EC. Measurement of pain. Lancet 1974; 9: 1127–1131.Google Scholar
Katz J, Melzack R. Measurement of pain. Surg Clin North Am 1999; 79: 231–252.Google Scholar
Conférence de Consensus. Prise en charge de la douleur postopératoire chez l'adulte et l'enfant. Ann Fr Anesth Réanim 1998; 17: 445–461.
Ricard-Hibon A, Chollet C, Saada S, Loridant B, Marty J. A quality control program for acute pain management in out-of-hospital critical care medicine. Ann Emerg Med 1999; 34: 738–745.Google Scholar
Aubrun F, Monsel S, Langeron O, Coriat P, Riou B. Postoperative titration of intravenous morphine in the elderly. Anesthesiology 2002; 961: 17–23.Google Scholar
Aubrun F, Kalfon F, Mottet P, Langeron O, Riou B, Coriat P. Adjuntive analgesia with intravenous propacetamol does not reduce morphine-related adverse effects. Br J Anaesth 2003; 90: 1–6.Google Scholar
Kremer E, Atkinson JH, Ignelzi RJ. Measurement of pain: patient preference does not confound pain measurement. Pain 1981; 10; 241–248.Google Scholar
Revill SI, Robinson JO, Rosen M, Hogg MI. The reliability of a linear analogue for evaluating pain. Anaesthesia 1976; 31: 1191–1198.Google Scholar
DeLoach LJ, Higgins MS, Caplan AB, Stigg JL. The visual analogue scale in the immediate postoperative period: intrasubject variability and correlation with a numeric scale. Anesth Analg 1998; 86: 102–106.Google Scholar
Berthier F, Potel G, Leconte P, Touze MD, Baron D. Comparative study of methods of measuring acute pain intensity in an ED. Am J Emerg Med 1998; 16: 132–136.Google Scholar
Breivnik EK, Björnsson GA, Skovlund E. A comparison of pain rating scales by sampling from clinical trial data. Clin J Pain 2000; 16: 22–28.Google Scholar
Terai T, Yukioka H, Asada A. Pain evaluation in the intensive care unit. Observer reported faces scale compared with self reported visual analog scale. Reg Anesth Pain Med 1998; 23: 147–151.Google Scholar
Wall RT. Use of analgesics in the elderly. Clin Geriatr Med 1990; 6: 345–364.Google Scholar
Portenoy RK, Kanner RM. Patterns of analgesic prescription and consumption in a university-affiliated community hospital. Arch Intern Med 1985; 145: 439–441.Google Scholar
Faherty BS, Grier MR. Analgesic medication for elderly people post-surgery. Nurse Res 1984; 33: 369–372.Google Scholar
Thomas T, Robinson C, Campion D, McKell M, Pell M. Prediction and assessment of the severity of postoperative pain and of satisfaction with management. Pain 1998; 75: 177–185.Google Scholar