Prospective clinical audit of chloral hydrate administration practices in a neonatal unit

Aim: Chloral hydrate is generally considered a safe and effective single dosing procedural sedative for neonates in the clinical setting. However, its safety profile as a repetitive dosing maintenance sedative is largely unknown. This study aimed to document current administration practices of chloral hydrate in the Neonatal Unit, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, over a 6-month period.

Methods: Patients who had been prescribed chloral hydrate during the specified audit period were recruited into the study and prospectively followed for a period of 28 days, or until they were discharged from the unit. Demographic data were collected on recruitment, and daily documentation of chloral hydrate administration was recorded.

Results: A total of 238 doses of chloral hydrate were administered to a cohort of 32 patients during the study period. The majority of the audited doses (84%) were ordered as repeating doses. Doses were more likely to be given at night than during the day, and the median dosage for repetitive dosing was found to be above the study site's recommended dosing range. Pre-dose and/or post-dose assessment of distress/agitation accompanied dosage approximately half of the time. The audit did not reveal any recognisable pattern of sedation maintenance or weaning process for patients who received multiple doses.

Conclusions: Health-care professionals caring for hospitalised infants should be made aware of the potential risks of chloral hydrate as a repetitive dosing sedative, and of the importance of systematically evaluating the appropriateness and effectiveness of utilising such pharmacological intervention for managing and treating distress.

A systematic review of interventions aimed at increasing physical activity in adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain-protocol

Background: Chronic musculoskeletal pain is highly prevalent, affecting around one in five people across Europe. Osteoarthritis, low back pain, neck pain and other musculoskeletal disorders are leading causes of disability
worldwide and the most common source of chronic pain. Exercise and/or physical activity interventions have the potential to address not only the pain and disability associated with chronic pain but also the increased risk of morbidity and mortality seen in this population. Although exercise and/or physical activity is widely recommended, there is currently a paucity of research that offers an evidence base upon which the development or optimisation of interventions can be based. This systematic review will investigate the components of interventions associated with changes in physical activity levels in adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain.

Methods/Design: This systematic review will be reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidance. Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of interventions aimed at increasing physical activity in adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain will be included. Articles will be identified through a comprehensive search of the following databases: CENTRAL in the Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and AMED. Two review authors will independently screen articles retrieved from the search for eligibility, extract relevant data on methodological issues and code interventions according to the behaviour change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques. As complex healthcare interventions can be modified by a wide variety of factors, data will be summarised statistically when the data are available, are sufficiently similar and are of sufficient quality. A narrative synthesis will be completed if there is insufficient data to permit a formal meta-analysis.

Discussion: This review will be of value to clinicians working in chronic pain services and to researchers involved in designing and evaluating interventions.

An exploration of nursing home managers' knowledge of and attitudes towards the management of pain in residents with dementia

Background The aims of this study were to explore the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs that nursing home managers hold with regard to the assessment and management of pain in residents with dementia and to determine how these may be affected by the demographic characteristics of the respondents.

Methods A questionnaire comprising six sections was mailed, on two occasions during March and April 2010, to 244 nursing home managers in Northern Ireland (representing 96% of the nursing homes in Northern Ireland).

Results The response rate was 39%. Nearly all respondents (96%) provided care to residents with dementia, yet only 60% of managers claimed to use pain treatment guidelines within their nursing home. Respondents demonstrated good knowledge about pain in residents with dementia and acknowledged the difficulties surrounding accurate pain assessment. Nursing home managers were uncertain about how to manage pain in residents with dementia, demonstrating similar concerns about the use of opioid analgesics to those reported in previous studies about pain in older people. Managers who had received recent training (p = 0.044) were less likely to have concerns about the use of opioid analgesia than those who had not received training. Respondents' beliefs about painkillers were largely ambivalent and were influenced by the country in which they had received their nursing education.

Conclusions The study has revealed that accurate pain assessment, training of nursing staff and a standardised approach to pain management (the use of pain management guidelines) within nursing homes all have a significant part to play in the successful management of pain in residents with dementia. Copyright (c) 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Community pharmacists and people with dementia: a cross-sectional survey exploring experiences, attitudes, and knowledge of pain and its management

Objectives
To explore community pharmacists' experiences with and attitudes towards people with dementia, and to determine the knowledge they have about pain and its management in this patient population. 

Methods
A questionnaire comprising five sections, including the Approaches to Dementia Questionnaire, was mailed, on two occasions, during February and March 2011, to all community pharmacies in Northern Ireland (n=530). 

Results
The response rate was 34.3%. A greater proportion of pharmacists provided pharmaceutical care to people with dementia living at home (91.2%) than those living in care homes (40.1%). Respondents most frequently encountered queries relating to starting and stopping medications, compliance with medication, and availability of formulation types. The mean total score for the Approaches to Dementia Questionnaire measure was 72.8, indicating a positive attitude towards people with dementia, and respondents demonstrated a strong person-centred approach towards this patient population. The majority of respondents recognised the difficulty of assessing pain in people with dementia; however, younger pharmacists (p=0.041) and pharmacists who provided pharmaceutical care to people with dementia (p=0.012) were more likely to be aware of the pain assessment tools for use in people with dementia. Pharmacists appeared uncertain about how to appropriately manage pain in people with dementia.

Conclusions
The study has revealed that community pharmacists often encounter people with dementia, especially those living in their own homes, and they have positive attitudes towards the patient population. However, training in the assessment and management of pain in people with dementia must be developed to further improve their knowledge in this area. 

Positioning Clinical Nurse Specialists and Nurse Practitioners as Change Champions to Implement a Pain Protocol in Long-Term Care

Pain management for older adults in long-term care (LTC) has been recognized as a problem internationally. The purpose of this study was to explore the role of a clinical nurse specialist (CNS) and nurse practitioner (NP) as change champions during the implementation of an evidence-based pain protocol in LTC. In this exploratory, multiple-case design study, we collected data from two LTC homes in Ontario, Canada. Three data sources were used: participant observation of an NP and a CNS for 18 hours each over a 3-week period; CNS and NP diaries recording strategies, barriers, and facilitators to the implementation process; and interviews with members of the interdisciplinary team to explore perceptions about the NP and CNS role in implementing the pain protocol. Data were analyzed using thematic content analysis. The NP and CNS used a variety of effective strategies to promote pain management changes in practice including educational outreach with team members, reminders to nursing staff to highlight the pain protocol and educate about practice changes, chart audits and feedback to the nursing staff, interdisciplinary working group meetings, ad hoc meetings with nursing staff, and resident assessment using advanced skills. The CNS and NP are ideal champions to implement pain management protocols and likely other quality improvement initiatives.

Defining and assessing animal pain

The detection and assessment of pain in animals is crucial to improving their welfare in a variety of contexts in which humans are ethically or legally bound to do so. Thus clear standards to judge whether pain is likely to occur in any animal species is vital to inform whether to alleviate pain or to drive the refinement of procedures to reduce invasiveness, thereby minimizing pain. We define two key concepts that can be used to evaluate the potential for pain in both invertebrate and vertebrate taxa. First, responses to noxious, potentially painful events should affect neurobiology, physiology and behaviour in a different manner to innocuous stimuli and subsequent behaviour should be modified including avoidance learning and protective responses. Second, animals should show a change in motivational state after experiencing a painful event such that future behavioural decision making is altered and can be measured as a change in conditioned place preference, self-administration of analgesia, paying a cost to access analgesia or avoidance of painful stimuli and reduced performance in concurrent events. The extent to which vertebrate and selected invertebrate groups fulfil these criteria is discussed in light of the empirical evidence and where there are gaps in our knowledge we propose future studies are vital to improve our assessment of pain. This review highlights arguments regarding animal pain and defines criteria that demonstrate, beyond a reasonable doubt, whether animals of a given species experience pain.

Walking Exercise for Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: To systematically review the evidence examining effects of walking interventions on pain and self-reported function in individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain.
Data Sources: Six electronic databases (Medline, CINAHL, PsychINFO, PEDro, Sport Discus and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched from January 1980 up to March 2014.
Study Selection: Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials in adults with chronic low back pain, osteoarthritis or fibromyalgia comparing walking interventions to a non-exercise or non-walking exercise control group.
Data Extraction: Data were independently extracted using a standardized form. Methodological quality was assessed using the United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) system.
Data Synthesis: Twenty-six studies (2384 participants) were included and suitable data from 17 were pooled for meta-analysis with a random effects model used to calculate between group mean differences and 95% confidence intervals. Data were analyzed according to length of follow-up (short-term: ≤8 weeks post randomization; medium-term: >2 months - 12 months; long-term: > 12 months). Interventions were associated with small to moderate improvements in pain at short (mean difference (MD) -5.31, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) -8.06 to -2.56) and medium-term follow-up (MD -7.92, 95% CI -12.37 to -3.48). Improvements in function were observed at short (MD -6.47, 95% CI -12.00 to -0.95), medium (MD -9.31, 95% CI -14.00 to -4.61) and long-term follow-up (MD -5.22, 95% CI 7.21 to -3.23).
Conclusions: Evidence of fair methodological quality suggests that walking is associated with significant improvements in outcome compared to control interventions but longer-term effectiveness is uncertain. Using the USPSTF system, walking can be recommended as an effective form of exercise or activity for individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain but should be supplemented with strategies aimed at maintaining participation. Further work is also required examining effects on important health related outcomes in this population in robustly designed studies.