ABSTRACT
Self-report pain assessment tools are commonly used in clinical settings to determine patients' pain intensity. The Iowa Pain Thermometer (IPT) is a tool that was developed for research, but also can be used in clinical settings. However, its utility in clinical settings is challenging because it uses a 13-point scale (0-12 scale) that does not align with common electronic pain scoring metrics. Therefore, this study evaluated the psychometric properties of an 11-point (0-10 scale) adaptation of the Iowa Pain Thermometer (IPT-R) to evaluate the psychometric properties of the IPT-R and to determine patient preference for a self-report pain assessment tool. A descriptive, correlational design was employed. The IPT-R was compared with the original IPT and a numeric rating scale (NRS). This study was conducted in the southeastern United States with 75 adults ranging in age from 65-95 years with varying levels of cognition. Participants were primarily representative of black and white backgrounds. Participants were asked to rate current pain, worst pain during the past week, and reassessment of current pain after 10-minute intervals using three scales (IPT-R, IPT, and NRS) presented in random order. Participants were asked to identify the tool preferred (the easiest to use and that best represented their pain intensity). Spearman-rank correlations were performed to determine convergent validity and test-retest reliability. Based on the results of this preliminary study, the IPT-R has good validity and reliability. The participants in this sample preferred the IPT-R over the original IPT (0-12 scale) and the traditional NRS (0-10 scale). Clinicians may consider using this tool with diverse older patients to assess pain intensity.
Subject(s)
Cognitive Dysfunction/psychology , Pain Measurement/instrumentation , Pain/diagnosis , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Case-Control Studies , Cognitive Dysfunction/complications , Female , Humans , Male , Pain/complications , Pain/psychology , Pain Measurement/methods , Patient Preference , Pilot Projects , Psychometrics , Reproducibility of Results , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To explore patient satisfaction among newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer in a rural community setting using a nurse navigation model. DESIGN: Nonexperimental, descriptive study. SETTING: Large, multispecialty physician outpatient clinic serving about 150 newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer annually at the time of the study. SAMPLE: 103 patients using nurse navigation services during a two-year period. METHODS: A researcher-developed 14-item survey tool using a Likert-type scale was mailed to about 300 navigated patients. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Nurse navigation and patient satisfaction. FINDINGS: The majority of participants (n = 73, 72%) selected "strongly agree" in each survey statement when questioned about the benefits of nurse navigation. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving nurse navigation for breast cancer are highly satisfied with the services offered in this setting. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Findings from this study offer insight regarding the effectiveness of an individualized supportive care approach to nurses and providers of oncology care. That information can be used to guide the implementation of future nurse navigation programs, determine effective methods of guiding patients through the cancer experience, and aid in promoting the highest standard of oncology care.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/nursing , Breast Neoplasms/psychology , Community Health Nursing/organization & administration , Oncology Nursing/organization & administration , Patient Satisfaction , Rural Health Services/organization & administration , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Ambulatory Care/organization & administration , Female , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Middle Aged , Models, Nursing , Program Evaluation , Social SupportABSTRACT
Although HIV infection is increasing among all women, pregnant women are primarily targeted for testing. The authors explore the experience of nonpregnant women seeking HIV testing, particularly factors that influenced testing, waiting for results, and the testing process. They interviewed 26 first-time testers, analyzed transcripts independently, then compared and consensually validated. Phenomenological reflection guided thematic analysis. A pattern of Worry emerged from relational themes evident in three phases of the experience: (a) Deciding, (b) Testing, and (c) What Next? Participants identified HIV testing as stressful, even when they regarded the process positively. Findings can sensitize providers to women's perceptions, decision making, and barriers to testing. Providers are challenged to provide accessible testing that protects confidentiality in conjunction with supportive discussion of concerns.
