• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

[认知受损养老院居民的标准化疼痛评估:比较痴呆症护理单元和综合护理单元评估工具的使用情况]

[Standardised pain assessment in cognitively impaired nursing home residents: Comparing the use of assessment tools in dementia care units and in integrated care units].

作者信息

Palm Rebecca, Sirsch Erika, Holle Bernhard, Bartholomeyczik Sabine

机构信息

Deutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen (DZNE) e.V., Standort Witten, Witten, Deutschland; Private Universität Witten/Herdecke, Fakultät für Gesundheit, Department Pflegewissenschaft, Witten, Deutschland.

Philosophisch-Theologische Hochschule Vallendar (PTHV), Fakultät für Pflegewissenschaft, Vallendar, Deutschland.

出版信息

Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2017 May;122:32-40. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2017.04.008. Epub 2017 May 16.

DOI:10.1016/j.zefq.2017.04.008
PMID:28522283
Abstract

BACKGROUND

A large number of nursing home residents with cognitive impairments (CI) suffer from chronic pain, which is also discussed as a reason for challenging behavior. To assess pain in people with severe CI, the use of an observational pain instrument is recommended; for people without or with mild CI the gold standard is a self-rating instrument. It is unknown whether in German nursing homes pain assessment in residents with severe CI is actually conducted using observational instruments and which instruments are used. Because of different resident structure we assume that in dementia care units observational pain instruments are more often used than in integrated care units. The aim of this study was to investigate the conduction of pain assessments and the instruments used in both types of care units.

METHODS

We conducted an observational study based on standardized data collection. A questionnaire was used to elicit whether pain assessment had been performed and what kind of instrument had been used last time. The cognitive status was also assessed. Based on these data, we determined for each resident whether a self- or proxy-rating instrument had been applied, considering his or her cognitive status. Afterwards, the resident data were aggregated on a care unit level. The use of single instruments was calculated in percentages. Differences between dementia care units and integrated care units were investigated with descriptive statistics and an independent t-test. A mixed-effects binary regression model was used to adjust for cluster effects.

RESULTS

The analysis sample consisted of n = 1,397 participating residents living in n = 75 care units (n = 30 dementia care units; n = 45 integrated care units). In the dementia care units, a mean of 82 % of residents with severe cognitive impairments was assessed using an observational proxy-rating assessment instrument; in the traditional integrated care units a percentage of 42 % was calculated. In the dementia care units, the median percentage of residents with severe cognitive impairments who were assessed with a self-rating instrument was below 10 %; in integrated care units it was 51 %. The differences were statistically significant. A mixed regression model confirmed the results. In the majority of dementia care units a single pain assessment tool was used for all residents; in 18 of 30 dementia care units this was a proxy-rated observational instrument.

DISCUSSION

The results indicate that pain assessment in cognitively impaired patients is suboptimal in many integrated care units because the nurses use inappropriate instruments. Also, they confirm the results of previous studies by demonstrating that instruments are used in clinical practice that are not recommended because their German-language versions are not validated. Since valid pain assessment is a prerequisite to appropriate pain treatment, we may assume that in many residents this is also not carried out as recommended.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Especially in integrated units, a defined and consented method of pain assessment is important because of the differences in their residents' cognitive and verbal abilities. Appropriate education may help to improve this process.

摘要

背景

大量患有认知障碍(CI)的养老院居民饱受慢性疼痛之苦,慢性疼痛也被认为是引发攻击性行为的一个原因。为评估重度认知障碍患者的疼痛状况,建议使用观察性疼痛评估工具;对于无认知障碍或轻度认知障碍患者,金标准是自评工具。目前尚不清楚在德国养老院中,重度认知障碍患者的疼痛评估是否实际使用观察性工具,以及使用了哪些工具。由于居民结构不同,我们推测在失智症护理单元比在综合护理单元更常使用观察性疼痛评估工具。本研究旨在调查这两类护理单元中疼痛评估的实施情况及所使用的工具。

方法

我们基于标准化数据收集开展了一项观察性研究。使用一份问卷来了解是否进行了疼痛评估以及上次使用的是何种工具。同时也评估了认知状况。基于这些数据,我们根据每位居民的认知状况确定是应用了自评工具还是代理评工具。之后,将居民数据汇总到护理单元层面。以百分比形式计算单一工具的使用情况。通过描述性统计和独立样本t检验研究失智症护理单元与综合护理单元之间的差异。使用混合效应二元回归模型来调整聚类效应。

结果

分析样本包括居住在75个护理单元中的1397名参与研究的居民(30个失智症护理单元;45个综合护理单元)。在失智症护理单元,平均82%的重度认知障碍居民使用观察性代理评评估工具进行评估;在传统综合护理单元,这一比例为42%。在失智症护理单元,使用自评工具评估的重度认知障碍居民的中位数百分比低于10%;在综合护理单元则为51%。差异具有统计学意义。混合回归模型证实了该结果。在大多数失智症护理单元,所有居民都使用单一的疼痛评估工具;在30个失智症护理单元中的18个,这是一种代理评观察性工具。

讨论

结果表明,在许多综合护理单元中,认知障碍患者的疼痛评估并不理想,因为护士使用了不恰当的工具。此外,研究结果还证实了先前的研究结果,即临床实践中使用的工具不被推荐,因为其德语版本未经验证。由于有效的疼痛评估是适当疼痛治疗的前提,我们可以推测,许多居民的疼痛治疗也未按推荐进行。

实际意义

尤其是在综合护理单元,鉴于其居民认知和语言能力的差异,确定并得到认可的疼痛评估方法很重要。适当的培训可能有助于改善这一过程。

相似文献

1
[Standardised pain assessment in cognitively impaired nursing home residents: Comparing the use of assessment tools in dementia care units and in integrated care units].[认知受损养老院居民的标准化疼痛评估:比较痴呆症护理单元和综合护理单元评估工具的使用情况]
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2017 May;122:32-40. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2017.04.008. Epub 2017 May 16.
2
Pain treatment for nursing home residents differs according to cognitive state - a cross-sectional study.养老院居民的疼痛治疗因认知状态而异——一项横断面研究。
BMC Geriatr. 2016 Jun 17;16:124. doi: 10.1186/s12877-016-0295-1.
3
Systematic pain assessment in nursing homes: a cluster-randomized trial using mixed-methods approach.养老院中的系统性疼痛评估:一项采用混合方法的整群随机试验。
BMC Geriatr. 2017 Feb 28;17(1):61. doi: 10.1186/s12877-017-0454-z.
4
The impact of a pain assessment intervention on pain score and analgesic use in older nursing home residents with severe dementia: A cluster randomised controlled trial.疼痛评估干预对重症痴呆老年疗养院居民疼痛评分和镇痛药使用的影响:一项整群随机对照试验。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2018 Aug;84:52-60. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.04.017. Epub 2018 Apr 30.
5
Pain prevalence among residents living in nursing homes and its association with quality of life and well-being.养老院居民的疼痛患病率及其与生活质量和幸福感的关系。
Scand J Caring Sci. 2021 Dec;35(4):1332-1341. doi: 10.1111/scs.12955. Epub 2021 Jan 6.
6
Differences in Case Conferences in Dementia Specific vs Traditional Care Units in German Nursing Homes: Results from a Cross-Sectional Study.德国养老院中痴呆症专科护理单元与传统护理单元病例讨论会的差异:一项横断面研究的结果
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016 Jan;17(1):91.e9-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2015.08.018. Epub 2015 Oct 1.
7
Exploring the prevalence and variance of cognitive impairment, pain, neuropsychiatric symptoms and ADL dependency among persons living in nursing homes; a cross-sectional study.探索疗养院居住者认知障碍、疼痛、神经精神症状及日常生活活动能力依赖的患病率和差异:一项横断面研究。
BMC Geriatr. 2016 Aug 22;16(1):154. doi: 10.1186/s12877-016-0328-9.
8
Observer-rated pain assessment instruments improve both the detection of pain and the evaluation of pain intensity in people with dementia.观察者评估疼痛量表可以提高痴呆患者疼痛的检出率和疼痛强度评估。
Eur J Pain. 2013 Nov;17(10):1558-68. doi: 10.1002/j.1532-2149.2013.00336.x. Epub 2013 Jun 4.
9
Cognitive status and analgesic provision in nursing home residents.疗养院居民的认知状态与镇痛措施
Br J Gen Pract. 2004 Dec;54(509):919-21.
10
Systematic pain assessment using an observational scale in nursing home residents with dementia: exploring feasibility and applied interventions.使用观察量表对养老院痴呆症患者进行系统性疼痛评估:探索可行性及应用干预措施。
J Clin Nurs. 2012 Nov;21(21-22):3009-17. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2012.04313.x.

引用本文的文献

1
[Pain situation among older adults in need of care in the outpatient care setting and cognitively or physically unable to respond : Challenges and recommendations].[门诊护理环境中需要护理且认知或身体上无法做出回应的老年人的疼痛状况:挑战与建议]
Schmerz. 2019 Dec;33(6):523-532. doi: 10.1007/s00482-019-00404-5.