Pain Assessment Preferences in Healthcare Providers: A Survey from Turkey

Author:

KISA Eylül Pınar1ORCID,CAVLAK Uğur1ORCID,MERCAN Damla2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. BIRUNI UNIVERSITY

2. BİRUNİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SAĞLIK BİLİMLERİ ENSTİTÜSÜ

Abstract

Objective: Pain assessment of individuals with acute or chronic pain while creating a physiotherapy program is of great importance in demonstrating the effectiveness of the treatment. The aim of this study is to determine the pain assessment preferences of healthcare providers. Material and Method: We tried to reach different healthcare providers who are dealing with patients suffering from pain, living and working in Turkey via a Google survey. Healthcare providers (aged 18-60) with at least one year of work experience in their field were included. In the questionnaire, age, gender, profession, working time in the profession, institution, acute/chronic patient follow-up, pain severity assessment scale preference, and pain localization assessment preference were questioned. Results: A total of 159 healthcare providers (114 females and 45 males) participated in this survey and replied to the questionnaire. 54.7% of them reported that they preferred the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and 11.9% of them preferred the Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) to evaluate pain intensity. The participants preferred verbal feedback and palpation to determine pain localization. Conclusion: In this survey was conducted in Turkey, health providers’ preferences were found to be similar to the related literature. The results obtained from this survey also indicate that health providers working in Turkey mostly prefer VAS in pain intensity assessment.

Publisher

Izmir Katip Celebi University Faculty of Health Sciences

Reference20 articles.

1. Patricia H. Berry, C Richard Chapman, Edward C Covington, June L, DahlJeffery A, Katz Christine Miaskowski et al. NPC and JCAHO (National Pharmaceutical Council Joint Commission on Acreditation of Health Care Organizations). Pain: Current Understanding of Assessment Management and Treatments. 2001; 21.

2. Bonica JJ. The need of a taxonomy. Pain 1979; 6:247–8.

3. IASP Subcommittee on Taxonomy. Pain terms: a list with definitions and notes on usage. Recommended by the IASP Subcommittee on Taxonomy. Pain 1979; 6:249–52.

4. Bowers KS. Pain, anxiety, and perceived control. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1968 Oct;32(5):596-602. doi: 10.1037/h0026280.

5. Raja SN, Carr DB, Cohen M, Finnerup NB, Flor H, Gibson S, et al. The revised International Association for the Study of Pain definition of pain: concepts, challenges, and compromises. Pain. 2020 Sep 1;161(9):1976-1982. DOI: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001939.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Phantom Limb Pain Rating Scale: A Scale Development Study;Journal of Basic and Clinical Health Sciences;2024-05-31

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3