Lukas A, Mayer B, Onder G, Bernabei R, Denkinger M D
Geriatrie/Zentrum für Altersmedizin, Malteser Krankenhaus Seliger Gerhard Bonn/Rhein-Sieg, Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus der Universität Bonn, Von-Hompesch-Str. 1, 53123, Bonn, Deutschland,
Schmerz. 2015 Aug;29(4):411-21. doi: 10.1007/s00482-015-0004-6.
A considerable number of nursing home residents suffering from pain are insufficiently treated. International comparisons of pain management in German (GER) and other European (EU) nursing homes are still lacking.
This study compared the treatment of pain in GER and EU nursing homes in order to improve allocation of therapeutic resources.
A cross-sectional study was carried out with 4156 residents assessed using the interRAI instrument for long-term care facilities, including pharmacological and non-pharmacological pain management modalities. Only those residents reporting pain were included in the analyses (n = 1900 from EU and 245 from GER). Descriptive analyses and analyses of correlations between different parameters and pain were performed.
More than three quarters of the residents with at least moderate pain received pharmacological treatment (GER: 77.4 % and EU: 79.3 %). Combination therapy (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) was more frequent in Germany (approximately 13 %). Even in cases of moderate to severe pain one third of GER compared to one quarter of the EU residents received either no analgesic treatment or only on a when needed basis (PRN). Differences were also seen in drugs used (GER metamizole). The amount of PRN was higher in Germany (approximately 13 %, alone or in combination). Only 5 % received the recommended level of non-pharmacological treatment. Pain severity and decubitus were identified as important triggers for pharmacological treatment. Non-pharmacological treatment was used less often than analgesics (EU: 39.2 %, GER: 46.8 %). There were no differences regarding administration frequency and intensity of non-pharmacological treatments in residents with or without pain; however, non-pharmacological treatment was used less often in residents with successful pharmacological treatment.
The data demonstrate significant deficits in the recognition and treatment of pain in residents living in German or other European nursing home facilities. Further scope for improvement is seen in better recognition of relevant pain, in the adequate use of PRN and long-term medication and especially in the use of activating non-pharmacological treatment.
相当数量患有疼痛的疗养院居民未得到充分治疗。德国(GER)和其他欧洲(EU)疗养院疼痛管理的国际比较仍然缺乏。
本研究比较了德国和欧洲疗养院的疼痛治疗情况,以改善治疗资源的分配。
采用interRAI长期护理设施评估工具对4156名居民进行横断面研究,包括药物和非药物疼痛管理方式。分析仅纳入报告疼痛的居民(欧盟1900名,德国245名)。进行了描述性分析以及不同参数与疼痛之间的相关性分析。
至少中度疼痛的居民中,超过四分之三接受了药物治疗(德国:77.4%,欧盟:79.3%)。联合治疗(药物和非药物)在德国更为常见(约13%)。即使在中度至重度疼痛的情况下,德国三分之一的居民与欧盟四分之一的居民相比,要么未接受镇痛治疗,要么仅按需治疗(PRN)。在使用的药物方面也存在差异(德国使用安乃近)。德国按需治疗的比例更高(约13%,单独或联合使用)。只有5%的居民接受了推荐水平的非药物治疗。疼痛严重程度和褥疮被确定为药物治疗的重要触发因素。非药物治疗的使用频率低于镇痛药(欧盟:39.2%,德国:46.8%)。在有疼痛或无疼痛的居民中,非药物治疗的给药频率和强度没有差异;然而,在药物治疗成功的居民中,非药物治疗的使用频率较低。
数据表明,居住在德国或其他欧洲疗养院设施中的居民在疼痛识别和治疗方面存在重大不足。在更好地识别相关疼痛、合理使用按需治疗和长期用药,特别是在使用积极的非药物治疗方面,仍有进一步改进的空间。