↓ Skip to main content

McMaster University

An Action-Based Approach to Improving Pain Management in Long-Term Care*

Overview of attention for article published in Canadian Journal on Aging, December 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
Title
An Action-Based Approach to Improving Pain Management in Long-Term Care*
Published in
Canadian Journal on Aging, December 2010
DOI 10.1017/s0714980810000528
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sharon Kaasalainen, Kevin Brazil, Esther Coker, Jenny Ploeg, Ruth Martin-Misener, Faith Donald, Alba DiCenso, Thomas Hadjistavropoulos, Lisa Dolovich, Alexandra Papaioannou, Anna Emili, Tim Burns

Abstract

The study purposes were twofold: (1) to explore barriers to pain management and those associated with implementing a pain management program in long-term care (LTC); and (2) to develop an interprofessional approach to improve pain management in LTC. A case study approach included both qualitative and quantitative components. We collected data at two LTC sites using seven focus groups for the licensed nurses, unregulated care providers and physicians, and 10 interviews with other health care provider groups, administration, and residents. We reviewed documents and administered a short survey to study participants to assess perceptions of barriers to pain management. The findings revealed barriers to effective LTC pain management at the resident/family, health care provider, and system levels. We then developed a six-tiered model with proposed interventions to address these barriers. This model can guide the development of innovative approaches to improving pain management in LTC settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 12 20%
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Researcher 5 8%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 15 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 16 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 26%
Psychology 5 8%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 18 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 24 April 2016.
All research outputs
#22,834,739
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Journal on Aging
#536
of 557 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,600
of 191,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Journal on Aging
#48
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 557 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 191,397 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.