Postoperative pain documentation 30 years after

Postoperative pain documentation 30 years after This issue of the Scandinavian Journal of Pain contains a review by Heikkilaa and co-workers on postoperative pain documentation [1]. Their systematic search and appraisal yielded 10 out of 2209 articles which they integrated into a qualitative review. The primary finding is sobering: all 10 studies reported that the quality of postoperative pain documentation did not meet acceptable standards.The authors are to be commended for undertaking this project and their efforts to report in detail the outcomes of the studies analyzed. However, some caveats apply when interpreting their results. Most of the studies were retrospective and included important weaknesses such as lack of specification of the sample size (in one study) and unclear duration of auditing and number of investigators (in half the studies). Five studies were conducted in the USA, four in different countries outside Europe and only one in Europe (Sweden); five of the studies were published by the same group, making the generalizability of the results questionable. As expected, there was a large heterogeneity in the auditing tools used in the different studies, making data synthesis a challenging task. Nonetheless, despite the limitations, the Heikkilaa and co-workers’ review gives opportunity for reflection and raises important questions.1Pain http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Scandinavian Journal of Pain de Gruyter

Postoperative pain documentation 30 years after

Loading next page...
 
/lp/degruyter/postoperative-pain-documentation-30-years-after-CnsdZdAZh6
Publisher
De Gruyter
Copyright
© 2016 Scandinavian Association for the Study of Pain
ISSN
1877-8860
eISSN
1877-8879
D.O.I.
10.1016/j.sjpain.2016.01.007
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This issue of the Scandinavian Journal of Pain contains a review by Heikkilaa and co-workers on postoperative pain documentation [1]. Their systematic search and appraisal yielded 10 out of 2209 articles which they integrated into a qualitative review. The primary finding is sobering: all 10 studies reported that the quality of postoperative pain documentation did not meet acceptable standards.The authors are to be commended for undertaking this project and their efforts to report in detail the outcomes of the studies analyzed. However, some caveats apply when interpreting their results. Most of the studies were retrospective and included important weaknesses such as lack of specification of the sample size (in one study) and unclear duration of auditing and number of investigators (in half the studies). Five studies were conducted in the USA, four in different countries outside Europe and only one in Europe (Sweden); five of the studies were published by the same group, making the generalizability of the results questionable. As expected, there was a large heterogeneity in the auditing tools used in the different studies, making data synthesis a challenging task. Nonetheless, despite the limitations, the Heikkilaa and co-workers’ review gives opportunity for reflection and raises important questions.1Pain

Journal

Scandinavian Journal of Painde Gruyter

Published: Apr 1, 2016

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off