Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Anaesthesia ; 74(1): 69-73, 2019 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30367688

ABSTRACT

The effect of patient-controlled analgesia during the emergency phase of care on the prevalence of persistent pain is unkown. We studied individuals with traumatic injuries or abdominal pain 6 months after hospital admission via the emergency department using an opportunistic observational study design. This was conducted using postal questionnaires that were sent to participants recruited to the multi-centre pain solutions in the emergency setting study. Patients with prior chronic pain states or opioid use were not studied. Questionnaires included the EQ5D, the Brief Pain Inventory and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale. Overall, 141 out of 286 (49% 95%CI 44-56%) patients were included in this follow-up study. Participants presenting with trauma were more likely to develop persistent pain than those presenting with abdominal pain, 45 out of 64 (70%) vs. 24 out of 77 (31%); 95%CI 24-54%, p < 0.001. There were no statistically significant associations between persistent pain and analgesic modality during hospital admission, age or sex. Across both abdominal pain and traumatic injury groups, participants with persistent pain had lower EQ5D mobility scores, worse overall health and higher anxiety and depression scores (p < 0.05). In the abdominal pain group, 13 out of 50 (26%) patients using patient-controlled analgesia developed persistent pain vs. 11 out of 27 (41%) of those with usual treatment; 95%CI for difference (control - patient-controlled analgesia) -8 to 39%, p = 0.183. Acute pain scores at the time of hospital admission were higher in participants who developed persistent pain; 95%CI 0.7-23.6, p = 0.039. For traumatic pain, 25 out of 35 (71%) patients given patient-controlled analgesia developed persistent pain vs. 20 out of 29 (69%) patients with usual treatment; 95%CI -30 to 24%, p = 0.830. Persistent pain is common 6 months after hospital admission, particularly following trauma. The study findings suggest that it may be possible to reduce persistent pain (at least in patients with abdominal pain) by delivering better acute pain management. Further research is needed to confirm this hypothesis.


Subject(s)
Abdominal Pain/epidemiology , Abdominal Pain/prevention & control , Analgesia, Patient-Controlled/methods , Chronic Pain/epidemiology , Chronic Pain/prevention & control , Emergency Service, Hospital , Pain Management/methods , Wounds and Injuries/complications , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Chronic Pain/etiology , Drug Utilization , Emergency Medical Services , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Pain Measurement , Sex Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires
2.
BMJ Open ; 6(10): e012853, 2016 10 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27798024

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The Rehabilitation EnAblement in CHronic Heart Failure in patients with Heart Failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (REACH-HFpEF) pilot trial is part of a research programme designed to develop and evaluate a facilitated, home-based, self-help rehabilitation intervention to improve self-care and quality of life (QoL) in heart failure patients and their caregivers. We will assess the feasibility of a definitive trial of the REACH-HF intervention in patients with HFpEF and their caregivers. The impact of the REACH-HF intervention on echocardiographic outcomes and bloodborne biomarkers will also be assessed. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A single-centre parallel two-group randomised controlled trial (RCT) with 1:1 individual allocation to the REACH-HF intervention plus usual care (intervention) or usual care alone (control) in 50 HFpEF patients and their caregivers. The REACH-HF intervention comprises a REACH-HF manual with supplementary tools, delivered by trained facilitators over 12 weeks. A mixed methods approach will be used to assess estimation of recruitment and retention rates; fidelity of REACH-HF manual delivery; identification of barriers to participation and adherence to the intervention and study protocol; feasibility of data collection and outcome burden. We will assess the variance in study outcomes to inform a definitive study sample size and assess methods for the collection of resource use and intervention delivery cost data to develop the cost-effectiveness analyses framework for any future trial. Patient outcomes collected at baseline, 4 and 6 months include QoL, psychological well-being, exercise capacity, physical activity and HF-related hospitalisation. Caregiver outcomes will also be assessed, and a substudy will evaluate impact of the REACH-HF manual on resting global cardiovascular function and bloodborne biomarkers in HFpEF patients. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is approved by the East of Scotland Research Ethics Service (Ref: 15/ES/0036). Findings will be disseminated via journals and presentations to clinicians, commissioners and service users. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN78539530; Pre-results .


Subject(s)
Exercise , Heart Failure/rehabilitation , Self Care , Stroke Volume , Adolescent , Adult , Caregivers , Chronic Disease , Female , Humans , Male , Pilot Projects , Quality of Life , Research Design
3.
BMJ Open ; 5(12): e009994, 2015 Dec 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26700291

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The Rehabilitation EnAblement in CHronic Heart Failure (REACH-HF) trial is part of a research programme designed to develop and evaluate a health professional facilitated, home-based, self-help rehabilitation intervention to improve self-care and health-related quality of life in people with heart failure and their caregivers. The trial will assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the REACH-HF intervention in patients with systolic heart failure and impact on the outcomes of their caregivers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A parallel two group randomised controlled trial with 1:1 individual allocation to the REACH-HF intervention plus usual care (intervention group) or usual care alone (control group) in 216 patients with systolic heart failure (ejection fraction <45%) and their caregivers. The intervention comprises a self-help manual delivered by specially trained facilitators over a 12-week period. The primary outcome measure is patients' disease-specific health-related quality of life measured using the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire at 12 months' follow-up. Secondary outcomes include survival and heart failure related hospitalisation, blood biomarkers, psychological well-being, exercise capacity, physical activity, other measures of quality of life, patient safety and the quality of life, psychological well-being and perceived burden of caregivers at 4, 6 and 12 months' follow-up. A process evaluation will assess fidelity of intervention delivery and explore potential mediators and moderators of changes in health-related quality of life in intervention and control group patients. Qualitative studies will describe patient and caregiver experiences of the intervention. An economic evaluation will estimate the cost-effectiveness of the REACH-HF intervention plus usual care versus usual care alone in patients with systolic heart failure. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is approved by the North West-Lancaster Research Ethics Committee (ref 14/NW/1351). Findings will be disseminated via journals and presentations to publicise the research to clinicians, commissioners and service users. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN86234930; Pre-results.


Subject(s)
Heart Failure/rehabilitation , Quality of Life , Self Care/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Caregivers , Chronic Disease , Clinical Protocols , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Heart Failure/economics , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Self Care/economics , Single-Blind Method , Treatment Outcome , United Kingdom , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...