Patients’ Perceptions and Responses to Procedural Pain: Results From the Thunder Project II The American Association of Critical-Care Nurses Thunder Project II Research Question: What are the perceptions and responses of acutely/critically ill patients to procedural pain? Study Aims Describe patients’ perceptions of and responses to pain associated with six study procedures. Compare the pain perceptions and responses across procedures. Examine relationships between patients’ pain perceptions and responses and pre-procedural analgesic administration. Procedures Studied Turning Central Line Insertion Wound Drain Removal Non-burn Wound Dressing Change Tracheal Suctioning Femoral Sheath Removal Pain Dimensions Pain Intensity* Pain Quality* Pain Location Pain Behaviors Physiological Responses (HR and BP) * results reported in this presentation Pain Measures Children Ages 3-7 Pain Response Measure Intensity Oucher 0-5 Faces Location Child Body Outline Diagram Quality Patient states 3 words Behaviors Behavior checklist Heart rate Bedside monitor Blood pressure Bedside monitor Pain Measures Children Ages 8-12 Pain Response Measure Intensity Oucher 0-100 Numeric Rating Scale Location Adolescent Body Outline Diagram Quality Modified MPQ-SF Behaviors Behavior checklist Heart rate Bedside monitor Blood pressure Bedside monitor Pain Measures Ages 13-17 Pain Response Measure Intensity 0-10 intensity Numeric Rating Scale Location Adolescent Body Outline Diagram Quality Modified MPQ-SF Behaviors Behavior checklist Heart rate Bedside monitor Blood pressure Bedside monitor Pain Measures Ages 18 and up Pain Response Measure Intensity 0-10 intensity Numeric Rating Scale Location Adult Body Outline Diagram Quality Modified MPQ-SF Behaviors Behavior checklist Heart rate Bedside monitor Blood pressure Bedside monitor Other Information Procedural distress (ages 13 and up)* Debriefing question (ages 13 and up) Analgesic and sedative profile* Use of non-pharmacological interventions Procedure specific variables Generic procedure variables Demographic variables* * results reported in this presentation Data Collection Times TIME #1: Pre-Procedure TIME #2: Intra-Procedure – most painful part of procedure TIME #3: Post-Procedure – 10 minutes after end of procedure Thunder Project II Research Sites Data Collection Sites: 169 Sites reporting demographic info: 153 (90.5%) Research Associates: Dedicated Children’s Hospital avg 6/site ( 4.8) 17 (26.1%) Participating Sites: Regions Northwest 7% Southwest 14% Midwest 36% Northeast 24% South 17% International Sites 3% Total # sites reporting geographic location: 152 Size of Participating Hospitals: # Beds >500 26% < 50 1% 50-99 3% 100-199 12% 200-299 17% 400-499 16% 300-399 25% Type Of Units Participating In Thunder Project II Med-Surg Floor 7% Emerg Dept 1% Other Oncology 8% 3% Cardiac Cath 8% Prog Care/Tele 14% Specialty ICU 18% Med-Surg ICU 41% Sample: Age by Procedure Procedure Ages 4-12 Ages 13-17 Ages 18 Total Wound Care 2 7 412 421 Wound Drain Removal 1 18 548 567 Tracheal Suctioning 20 17 756 793 Turning 61 85 1395 1541 Femoral Sheath Removal 7 22 2629 2658 Central Line Placement 0 2 219 221 Total 91 151 5959 6201 Overall: age range 4-97 years; mean 60.6 years ( 16.3) Thunder Project II Sample 80 % of Patients 70 60 50 40 76 59 41 30 20 8 11 10 0 2 2 Gender Ethnicity Male Female Caucasian African American Native American Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander Mean Pain Intensity by Procedures (adults only) 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Mean Intensity Turning Drain Removal Wound Care Trach Sx Central Line Fem Sheath 4.93 4.67 4.42 3.94 2.72 2.65 Differences in Mean Pain Intensity (by procedure) Wound Care Drain Removal Trach Sx Turning Fem Sheath Wound Care Drain Removal Trach Sx Turning Fem Sheath Central Line = non-significant = significant Central Line Mean Pain Intensity by Age Group: Turning, Wound Drain Removal, Wound Care & Tracheal Suctioning 10 Mean Pain Reported 9 8 7 6.5 6.3 7 6 Turning 5.2 5 5 4 4.9 4.7 Drain Removal 4.4 3.9 2.7 3 2.8 Wound Care Trach Suction 2.3 2 1 1 0 4-7 yrs 8-12 yrs* 13-17 yrs 18 yrs & up * Scale modified from 0-100 Pain Quality Word List Sensory Sharp Tender Aching Stinging Heavy Stabbing Shooting Cramping Affective Dull Throbbing Hot-burning Gnawing Numb Splitting Tiring-exhausting Sickening Fearful-frightening Punishing-cruel Awful Bad Pain Quality Words: Decreased from Baseline % of Patients Reporting 50% 40% 30% T1 Baseline T2 Intraprocedure 20% 10% 0% Aching Dull Gnawing Pain Quality Words: Increased from Baseline % of Patients Reporting 40% 30% 20% T1 Baseline T2 Intraprocedure 10% 0% Sharp Stinging Stabbing Shooting Procedural Distress “On a scale where 0 means no distress and 10 means worst possible distress, how distressing or how bothersome was this procedure to you?” Degree of Distress Mean Distress Reported (by age group & procedure) 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 6 4.2 3.7 3.5 2.8 2.8 3.2 3.1 2 1.9 1.5 13-17 yrs 18 and up Wound Care Turn Trach Sx Drain Removal Fem Sheath Central Line Differences in Distress (by procedure, adults only) Wound Care Drain Removal Trach Sx Turning Fem Sheath Wound Care Drain Removal Trach Sx Turning Fem Sheath Central Line = non-significant = significant Central Line Opioids Prior to Procedure 97% 100% 86% 81% 80% 88% 87% % receiving opioids 75% 60% % NOT receiving opioids 40% 25% 19% 20% 14% 13% 12% 3% Su ct lL in Tr ac h tra C en io n e g rn in Tu al R em ov D ra in C ou nd W Fe m Sh ea t ar e h 0% Patients who received preprocedure opioids: Was pain present at baseline? 100% 88% 85% 76% 80% % with NO pain at Time 1 62% 60% 52% 48% % with pain at Time 1 38% 40% 24% 15% 20% 12% Dr a in g in rn Tu Re m ov al e Ca r W ou nd at Sh e m Fe Ce n tra ll in e h 0% Sedatives Prior to Procedure 97% 100% 80% 98% 99% 99% 78% 71% 60% 40% % receiving sedative 29% % NOT receiving sedative 22% 20% 3% 1% 1% Ce nt ra lL in e Fe m Sh ea th W ou nd Ca Tr re ac h Su ct io Dr n ai n Re m ov al Tu rn in g 0% 2% Local Anesthetic Prior to Procedure 97% 100% 80% 100% 100% 100% 71% 67% 60% % receiving LA 40% 29% 33% % NOT receiving LA 20% 0% ov a l 0% in R em ct io n Su D ra Tr ac h C ar e ou nd W Sh ea th Fe m C en tra lL in e 0% 0% Tu rn in g 3% Age Patients in the 13-17 year age group had greater pain intensity across four procedures than adults Wound care highest pain and distress – Relative length of the procedure may be more of a factor for adolescents – Body image issues and developmental level may also play a role Turning and Suctioning Turning most painful and most distressing procedure for adults – moderate level of pain – higher than with previous studies Suctioning – mild level of pain reported in this study – lower level than reported in previous studies Few patients received pre-medication for procedure Repetitive nature of these procedures – What is cumulative effect? Femoral Sheath and Central Line Placement Least painful Least distressing Patients received more medications overall and especially sedatives Lidocaine use more likely Procedures more likely to be protocol driven Pain Quality Extent of language used to describe procedural pain is broad Physiologic basis for quality words used – Baseline pain » aching, dull, gnawing » characteristics of slower, C-fiber transmission – Procedural pain » sharp, stinging, stabbing, shooting » characteristics of rapid, A-delta fiber transmission Limitations Sampling – convenience sample – no heavily sedated patients--experiences may differ No standardization of specific interventions for procedural pain Generalizability across age groups is limited due to small numbers of children; yet is largest study to date to include children Wound Care: Summary 10 Sensory/Affective Words 8 6 4 2 0 Wound Care Intensity Distress 4.4 2.8 Tender (58%) Sharp (44%) Stinging (36%) Aching (30%) Wound Drain Removal: Summary 10 6 Sensory/Affective Words 4 Sharp (52%) Stinging (38%) Tender (32%) 8 2 0 Drain Removal Intensity Distress 4.7 3.1 Tracheal Suctioning: Summary 10 8 6 4 2 0 Trach Suction Sensory/Affective Words Intensity Distress 3.9 3.2 Tender (36%) Sharp (34%) Aching (30%) Turning: Summary 10 8 6 4 2 0 Turning Sensory/Affective Words Intensity Distress 4.9 3.5 Sharp (47%) Aching (47%) Tender (38%) Bad (32%) Tiring(32%) exhaustive Femoral Sheath Removal: Summary 10 8 6 4 2 0 Fem Sheath Sensory/Affective Words Intensity Distress 2.7 2 Aching (34%) Tender (31%) Central Line Insertion: Summary 10 8 6 4 2 0 Central Line Sensory/Affective Words Intensity Distress 2.7 1.9 Sharp (38%) Stinging (38%) Stabbing (36%) Conclusions Pain intensity and distress vary considerably across procedures and age groups Incisive quality of procedural pain Be attentive to repetitive procedures and the potential need for analgesia Patient preparation may be very important – Inclusion of sensory descriptions when preparing patients for procedures may help Future Work Medications Pain Behaviors Procedure-specific information – location, procedure-related variables Age span – pediatric – elderly Instrumentation Managing multisite research