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
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 60 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 20% |
Student > Master | 8 | 13% |
Student > Bachelor | 7 | 12% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 12% |
Researcher | 5 | 8% |
Other | 6 | 10% |
Unknown | 15 | 25% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 27% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 27% |
Psychology | 5 | 8% |
Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
Other | 0 | 0% |
Unknown | 18 | 30% |