33
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Journal of Pain Research (submit here)

      This international, peer-reviewed Open Access journal by Dove Medical Press focuses on reporting of high-quality laboratory and clinical findings in all fields of pain research and the prevention and management of pain. Sign up for email alerts here.

      52,235 Monthly downloads/views I 2.832 Impact Factor I 4.5 CiteScore I 1.2 Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) I 0.655 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Patient perception of pain care in hospitals in the United States

      Dove Medical Press
      pain care, hospitals, hcahps

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Study objective Assessment of patients’ perception of pain control in hospitals in the United States. Background Limited data are available regarding the quality of pain care in the hospitalized patient. This is particularly valid for data that allow for comparison of pain outcomes from one hospital to another. Such data are critical for numerous reasons, including allowing patients and policy-makers to make data-driven decisions, and to guide hospitals in their efforts to improve pain care. The Hospital Quality Alliance was recently created by federal policy makers and private organizations in conjunction with the Centers for Medicare and Medicare Services to conduct patient surveys to evaluate their experience including pain control during their hospitalization. Methods In March 2008, the results of the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey was released for review for health care providers and researchers. This survey includes a battery of questions for patients upon discharge from the hospital including pain-related questions and patient satisfaction that provide valuable data regarding pain care nationwide. This study will review the results from the pain questions from this available data set and evaluate the performance of these hospitals in pain care in relationship to patient satisfaction. Furthermore, this analysis will be providing valuable information on how hospital size, geographic location and practice setting may play a role in pain care in US hospitals. Results The data indicates that 63% of patients gave a high rating of global satisfaction for their care, and that an additional 26% of patients felt that they had a moderate level of global satisfaction with the global quality of their care. When correlated to satisfaction with pain control, the relationship with global satisfaction and “always” receiving good pain control was highly correlated (r >0.84). In respect to the other HCAHPS components, we found that the patient and health care staff relationship with the patient is also highly correlated with pain relief (r >0.85). The patients’ reported level of pain relief was significantly different based upon hospital ownership, with government owned hospitals receiving the highest pain relief, followed by nonprofit hospitals, and lastly proprietary hospitals. Hospital care acuity also had an impact on the patient’s perception of their pain care; patients cared for in acute care hospitals had lower levels of satisfaction than critical access hospitals. Conclusions The results of this study are a representation of the experiences of patients in US hospitals with regard to pain care specifically and the need for improved methods of treating and evaluating pain care. This study provides the evidence needed for hospitals to make pain care a priority in to achieve patient satisfaction throughout the duration of their hospitalization. Furthermore, future research should be developed to make strategies for institutions and policy-makers to improve and optimize patient satisfaction with pain care.

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States.

          We have little systematic information about the extent to which standard processes involved in health care--a key element of quality--are delivered in the United States. We telephoned a random sample of adults living in 12 metropolitan areas in the United States and asked them about selected health care experiences. We also received written consent to copy their medical records for the most recent two-year period and used this information to evaluate performance on 439 indicators of quality of care for 30 acute and chronic conditions as well as preventive care. We then constructed aggregate scores. Participants received 54.9 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 54.3 to 55.5) of recommended care. We found little difference among the proportion of recommended preventive care provided (54.9 percent), the proportion of recommended acute care provided (53.5 percent), and the proportion of recommended care provided for chronic conditions (56.1 percent). Among different medical functions, adherence to the processes involved in care ranged from 52.2 percent for screening to 58.5 percent for follow-up care. Quality varied substantially according to the particular medical condition, ranging from 78.7 percent of recommended care (95 percent confidence interval, 73.3 to 84.2) for senile cataract to 10.5 percent of recommended care (95 percent confidence interval, 6.8 to 14.6) for alcohol dependence. The deficits we have identified in adherence to recommended processes for basic care pose serious threats to the health of the American public. Strategies to reduce these deficits in care are warranted. Copyright 2003 Massachusetts Medical Society
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Acute pain after thoracic surgery predicts long-term post-thoracotomy pain.

            Long-term pain is a common sequela of thoracotomy, occurring in approximately 50% of patients 2 years after thoracic surgery. Despite this alarming statistic, little is known about the factors responsible for the transition of acute to chronic pain. The aim of the present study is to identify predictors of long-term post-thoracotomy pain. Follow-up was for 1.5 years for patients who had participated in a prospective, randomized, controlled trial of preemptive, multimodal analgesia. Subjects were recruited from a tertiary care center. Thirty patients who had undergone lateral thoracotomy were followed up by telephone, administered a structured interview, and classified according to long-term pain status. Present pain status was measured by a verbal rating scale (VAS). Measures obtained within the first 48 h after surgery were compared between patients with and without pain 1.5 years later. These include VAS pain scores at rest and after movement, McGill Pain Questionnaire data, patient-controlled morphine consumption (mg), and pain thresholds to pressure applied to a rib contralateral to the thoracotomy incision. Fifty-two percent of patients reported long-term pain. Early postoperative pain was the only factor that significantly predicted long-term pain. Pain intensity 24 h after surgery, at rest, and after movement was significantly greater among patients who developed long-term pain compared with pain-free patients. A significant predictive relationship was also found at 24 and 48 h using the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Cumulative morphine was comparable for the two groups. Pain thresholds to pressure applied to a rib contralateral to the incision did not differ significantly between the groups. Aggressive management of early postoperative pain may reduce the likelihood of long-term post-thoracotomy pain.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Patients' perception of hospital care in the United States.

              Patients' perceptions of their care, especially in the hospital setting, are not well known. Data from the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey provide a portrait of patients' experiences in U.S. hospitals. We assessed the performance of hospitals across multiple domains of patients' experiences. We examined whether key characteristics of hospitals that are thought to enhance patients' experiences (i.e., a high ratio of nurses to patient-days, for-profit status, and nonacademic status) were associated with a better experience for patients. We also examined whether a hospital's performance on the HCAHPS survey was related to its performance on indicators of the quality of clinical care. We found moderately high levels of satisfaction with care (e.g., on average, 67.4% of a hospital's patients said that they would definitely recommend the hospital), with a high degree of correlation among the measures of patients' experiences (Cronbach's alpha, 0.94). As compared with hospitals in the bottom quartile of the ratio of nurses to patient-days, those in the top quartile had a somewhat better performance on the HCAHPS survey (e.g., 63.5% vs. 70.2% of patients responded that they "would definitely recommend" the hospital; P<0.001). Hospitals with a high level of patient satisfaction provided clinical care that was somewhat higher in quality for all conditions examined. For example, those in the top quartile of HCAHPS ratings performed better than those in the bottom quartile with respect to the care that patients received for acute myocardial infarction (actions taken to provide appropriate care as a proportion of all opportunities for providing such actions, 95.8% vs. 93.1% in unadjusted analyses; P<0.001) and for pneumonia (90.5% vs. 88.6% in unadjusted analyses, P<0.001). This portrait of patients' experiences in U.S. hospitals offers insights into areas that need improvement, suggests that the same characteristics of hospitals that lead to high nurse-staffing levels may be associated with better experiences for patients, and offers evidence that hospitals can provide both a high quality of clinical care and a good experience for the patient. 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                21197302
                3004628
                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

                Anesthesiology & Pain management
                pain care,hospitals,hcahps
                Anesthesiology & Pain management
                pain care, hospitals, hcahps

                Comments

                Comment on this article