↓ Skip to main content

Healthcare professionals’ descriptions of care experiences and actions when assessing postoperative pain – a critical incident technique analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 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
Healthcare professionals’ descriptions of care experiences and actions when assessing postoperative pain – a critical incident technique analysis
Published in
Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, December 2015
DOI 10.1111/scs.12308
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lotta Wikström, Kerstin Eriksson, Bengt Fridlund, Kristofer Årestedt, Anders Broström

Abstract

Pain is a common postoperative symptom, and length of hospital stay after surgery is short which highlights the importance of pain assessments. Experiences of assessing pain are mainly described from the perspective of nurses. In postoperative care, enrolled nurses and physicians also assess pain. It is therefore important to take note of their experiences to improve postoperative pain assessments. The aim of this study was, through considering critical incidents, to describe care experiences and actions taken by healthcare professionals when assessing postoperative pain. An explorative design employing critical incidents technique analysis was used. A total of 24 strategically selected enrolled nurses, nurses and physicians employed at orthopaedic or general surgery wards in four Swedish hospitals were interviewed. The intention was to reach variation in age, sex, profession and professional experience. In pain assessments, patient-related facilitators were patients' verbal and emotional expressions including pain ratings, while lack of consistency with observed behaviours was a barrier. Clinical competence, continuity in care and time were healthcare-related facilitators. The actions healthcare professionals took were gathering facts about patients' pain manifestations and adapting to patients' communication abilities. Patient observations, either passive or active were used to confirm or detect pain. Collaboration between healthcare professionals, including consultations with pain experts, social workers and relatives, strengthened understanding of pain. Communication skills and working conditions have an impact on performance of pain assessment. Patient comfort without compromising safety is reached by including healthcare professionals' dissimilar responsibilities when collecting patients' and relatives' perspectives on current pain.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 106 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Researcher 8 7%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 30 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 34 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 9%
Psychology 10 9%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 33 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 March 2016.
All research outputs
#15,403,045
of 24,417,958 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences
#486
of 814 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,359
of 401,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,417,958 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 814 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 401,633 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.