IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/nuhsci/v19y2017i3p381-387.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pain management in home hospice patients: A retrospective descriptive study

Author

Listed:
  • Cathy L. Campbell
  • Meghan Kelly
  • Virginia Rovnyak

Abstract

The development and evaluation of evidence‐based, safe, and effective home‐based pain management models for caregivers implementation is receiving greater attention in the literature because of international initiatives intended to increase the number of people who receive end‐of‐life care in home‐based settings. The purpose of this “retrospective descriptive design” study was to describe pharmacological pain management and outcomes for 40 cancer and non‐cancer patients receiving hospice care at home. While the median pain score was higher at admission in the cancer group than in the hospice care at home group, the difference was not significant at or within 48 hour of admission. Overall, there was a significant decrease in pain from the first measurement to the second. Within the last seven days of life, the majority of participants were not able to provide a pain severity score when asked to evaluate the effectiveness of pain management, thus their caregiver provided a proxy evaluation. Pain management was effective in the home setting. More research is needed on the best methods to teach lay caregivers to assess pain and evaluate the effectiveness of pharmacological modalities to manage pain.

Suggested Citation

  • Cathy L. Campbell & Meghan Kelly & Virginia Rovnyak, 2017. "Pain management in home hospice patients: A retrospective descriptive study," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 381-387, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:nuhsci:v:19:y:2017:i:3:p:381-387
    DOI: 10.1111/nhs.12359
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12359
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/nhs.12359?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:wly:nuhsci:v:19:y:2017:i:3:p:381-387. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1442-2018 .

    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.