↓ Skip to main content

Patients’ experiences and actions when describing pain after surgery – A critical incident technique analysis

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nursing Studies, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 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
Patients’ experiences and actions when describing pain after surgery – A critical incident technique analysis
Published in
International Journal of Nursing Studies, December 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.12.008
Pubmed ID
Authors

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

Abstract

Postoperative pain assessment remains a significant problem in clinical care despite patients wanting to describe their pain and be treated as unique individuals. Deeper knowledge about variations in patients' experiences and actions could help healthcare professionals to improve pain management and could increase patients' participation in pain assessments. The aim of this study was, through an examination of critical incidents, to describe patients' experiences and actions when needing to describe pain after surgery. An explorative design involving the critical incident technique was used. Patients from one university and three county hospitals in both urban and rural areas were included. To ensure variation of patients a strategic sampling was made according to age, gender, education and surgery. A total of 25 patients who had undergone orthopaedic or general surgery was asked to participate in an interview, of whom three declined. Pain experiences were described according to two main areas: "Patients' resources when in need of pain assessment" and "Ward resources for performing pain assessments". Patients were affected by their expectations and tolerance for pain. Ability to describe pain could be limited by a fear of coming into conflict with healthcare professionals or being perceived as whining. Furthermore, attitudes from healthcare professionals and their lack of adherence to procedures affected patients' ability to describe pain. Two main areas regarding actions emerged: "Patients used active strategies when needing to describe pain" and "Patients used passive strategies when needing to describe pain". Patients informed healthcare professionals about their pain and asked questions in order to make decisions about their pain situation. Selfcare was performed by distraction and avoiding pain or treating pain by themselves, while others were passive and endured pain or refrained from contact with healthcare professionals due to healthcare professionals' large work load.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Iceland 1 1%
Unknown 91 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 24%
Student > Master 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Researcher 6 6%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 24 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 35 38%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 17%
Psychology 7 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 24 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 12 March 2016.
All research outputs
#5,205,210
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nursing Studies
#775
of 2,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,687
of 399,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nursing Studies
#10
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
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 399,576 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 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 69% of its contemporaries.