↓ Skip to main content

Best‐practice pain management in the emergency department: A cluster‐randomised, controlled, intervention trial

Overview of attention for article published in Emergency Medicine Australasia, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Best‐practice pain management in the emergency department: A cluster‐randomised, controlled, intervention trial
Published in
Emergency Medicine Australasia, November 2015
DOI 10.1111/1742-6723.12498
Pubmed ID
Authors

David McD Taylor, Daniel M Fatovich, Daniel P Finucci, Jeremy Furyk, Sang-Won Jin, Gerben Keijzers, Stephen Pj Macdonald, Hugh Ma Mitenko, Joanna R Richardson, Joseph Ys Ting, Ogilvie N Thom, Antony M Ugoni, James A Hughes, Nerolie Bost, Meagan L Ward, Clinton R Gibbs, Ellen Macdonald, Dane R Chalkley

Abstract

We aimed to provide 'adequate analgesia' (which decreases the pain score by ≥2 and by <4 [0-10 scale]) and determine the effect on patient satisfaction. We undertook a multicentre, cluster-randomised, controlled, intervention trial in nine EDs. Patients with moderate pain (pain score of ≥4) were eligible for inclusion. The intervention was a range of educational activities to encourage staff to provide 'adequate analgesia'. It was introduced into five early intervention EDs between the 0 and 6 months time points and at four late intervention EDs between 3 and 6 months. At 0, 3 and 6 months, data were collected on demographics, pain scores, analgesia provided and pain management satisfaction 48 h post-discharge (6 point scale). Overall, 1317 patients were enrolled. Logistic regression (controlling for site and other confounders) indicated that, between 0 and 3 months, satisfaction increased significantly at the early intervention EDs (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.5 to 3.4 [P < 0.01]) but was stable at the control EDs (OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.5 to 1.3 [P = 0.35]). Pooling of data from all sites indicated that the proportion of patients very satisfied with their pain management increased from 42.9% immediately pre-intervention to 53.9% after 3 months of intervention (difference in proportions 11.0%, 95% CI 4.2 to 17.8 [P = 0.001]). Logistic regression of all data indicated that 'adequate analgesia' was significantly associated with patient satisfaction (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1 to 1.8 [P < 0.01]). The 'adequate analgesia' intervention significantly improved patient satisfaction. It provides a simple and efficient target in the pursuit of best-practice ED pain management.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Unknown 23 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 21%
Student > Postgraduate 3 13%
Lecturer 2 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 8%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 6 25%
Unknown 4 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Energy 1 4%
Unknown 6 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 January 2016.
All research outputs
#8,164,880
of 24,477,448 outputs
Outputs from Emergency Medicine Australasia
#983
of 1,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,292
of 396,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emergency Medicine Australasia
#13
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,477,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 396,526 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.