IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/clnure/v9y2000i4p379-397.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of Performance Feedback on Patient Pain Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Kathleen Duncan
  • Bunny Pozehl

    (University of Nebraska Medical Center)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of an individual feedback intervention provided to nurses on selected patient outcomes related to postoperative pain management. Individual performance feedback served as the intervention. Thirty orthopedic staff nurses received feedback information on their past performance of recommended pain management practices. Data were collected preintervention and postintervention on selected patient pain outcomes from the medical records of 240 patients who had undergone total knee arthroplasty. The patient outcome measures were mean 4-hour pain intensity ratings, mean highest pain intensity ratings, mean number of times pain ratings exceeded patients’ acceptable level of pain, mean administered morphine equivalents, and mean pain ratings on reassessment following analgesia administration. An improvement was noted in all pain outcomes following the feedback intervention. Results indicate that providing nurses with feedback on their past performance of pain management practices may contribute to decreased postoperative pain .

Suggested Citation

  • Kathleen Duncan & Bunny Pozehl, 2000. "Effects of Performance Feedback on Patient Pain Outcomes," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 9(4), pages 379-397, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:9:y:2000:i:4:p:379-397
    DOI: 10.1177/10547730022158645
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10547730022158645
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/10547730022158645?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:9:y:2000:i:4:p:379-397. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.