A Novel Electronic Method of Collecting Pain Scores in the Emergency Department
NCT ID: NCT03881982
Last Updated: 2020-01-30
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
105 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2017-08-03
2019-07-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The new electronic display uses buttons to represent a pain scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain). Patients will select the number that best corresponds to their pain every 15 minutes. In the experimental group, the score will be displayed on a screen. In the control group, the score will not be displayed. The investigators will compare the overall amount of pain in both groups, and will look at their pain management (painkillers prescribed). The investigators will also ask patients and staff for their opinions on the display.
The study will include adult patients in the emergency department at Leicester Royal Infirmary with an initial pain score of 5 or more who are able to make a decision about whether to participate. Participants will also need to be likely to stay in the hospital for more than 2 hours to allow the investigators to gather enough useful data. The study will recruit 200 participants. If the study can demonstrate that the monitor is acceptable to patients and staff and results in improved pain management, it is a low cost intervention which could be widely implemented within the NHS. It also has the potential for being used in other areas such as surgical wards. The investigators have previously found that 300-400 patients per week in the department have moderate to severe pain and might therefore benefit from this monitor.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Telemedically Supported Analgesia in the Emergency Medical Service
NCT01644032
Acupuncture Versus Intravenous Morphine in the Management of Acute Pain in the Emergency Department
NCT02460913
Anchoring Patients Pain Scores in the Emergency Department
NCT04717518
Acupuncture for Pain in the Emergency Department
NCT02540512
Use of ACUPUNCTURE in Emergency Departement
NCT01622959
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
OTHER
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
PIMPERNEL Novel Electronic Log - intervention
The display is an electronic version of the 11 point NRS. An audible 'beep' every 15 minutes prompts the patient to record their pain level.
The display measures 122mm x 30mm x 15mm. Through a wireless connection, the data from the display are transmitted to a display unit (a Nexus tablet).
PIMPERNEL Novel Electronic Log: Pain display can be seen
Pain scores are displayed on the screen when the participant presses the corresponding button
PIMPERNEL Novel Electronic Log - control
The display is an electronic version of the 11 point NRS. An audible 'beep' every 15 minutes prompts the patient to record their pain level.
The display measures 122mm x 30mm x 15mm. Through a wireless connection, the data from the display are transmitted to a display unit (a Nexus tablet).
PIMPERNEL Novel Electronic Log: Pain display is hidden
Participants press the buttons to record their pain score but the score is not on display (the screen is turned backwards).
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
PIMPERNEL Novel Electronic Log: Pain display can be seen
Pain scores are displayed on the screen when the participant presses the corresponding button
PIMPERNEL Novel Electronic Log: Pain display is hidden
Participants press the buttons to record their pain score but the score is not on display (the screen is turned backwards).
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* underlying condition giving rise to significant pain (initial VAS pain score of 5 or more)
* likely to be staying in the hospital for at least 2 hours
* willing and able to give informed consent
* able to understand and speak a good level of English
Exclusion Criteria
* patients not willing to undergo routine care (analgesic treatment)
* patients who do not have capacity to consent
* patients who are unwilling or unable to give informed consent
* prisoners
* patients who cannot understand the study information in English
* currently participating in another clinical trial as far as can be determined from information available at the time of assessment
* patients who have a physical or visual disability which will prevent them from holding or using the pain display
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Leicester
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Timothy J Coats, Prof
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Leicester
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Leicester Royal Infirmary
Leicester, Leicestershire, United Kingdom
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Johnston CC, Gagnon AJ, Fullerton L, Common C, Ladores M, Forlini S. One-week survey of pain intensity on admission to and discharge from the emergency department: a pilot study. J Emerg Med. 1998 May-Jun;16(3):377-82. doi: 10.1016/s0736-4679(98)00012-2.
Cordell WH, Keene KK, Giles BK, Jones JB, Jones JH, Brizendine EJ. The high prevalence of pain in emergency medical care. Am J Emerg Med. 2002 May;20(3):165-9. doi: 10.1053/ajem.2002.32643.
Ducharme J, Barber C. A prospective blinded study on emergency pain assessment and therapy. J Emerg Med. 1995 Jul-Aug;13(4):571-5. doi: 10.1016/0736-4679(95)80023-9.
Todd KH, Ducharme J, Choiniere M, Crandall CS, Fosnocht DE, Homel P, Tanabe P; PEMI Study Group. Pain in the emergency department: results of the pain and emergency medicine initiative (PEMI) multicenter study. J Pain. 2007 Jun;8(6):460-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2006.12.005. Epub 2007 Feb 15.
Motov SM, Khan AN. Problems and barriers of pain management in the emergency department: Are we ever going to get better? J Pain Res. 2008 Dec 9;2:5-11.
Rupp T, Delaney KA. Inadequate analgesia in emergency medicine. Ann Emerg Med. 2004 Apr;43(4):494-503. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2003.11.019.
Loryman B, Davies F, Chavada G, Coats T. Consigning "brutacaine" to history: a survey of pharmacological techniques to facilitate painful procedures in children in emergency departments in the UK. Emerg Med J. 2006 Nov;23(11):838-40. doi: 10.1136/emj.2006.034140.
Brown JC, Klein EJ, Lewis CW, Johnston BD, Cummings P. Emergency department analgesia for fracture pain. Ann Emerg Med. 2003 Aug;42(2):197-205. doi: 10.1067/mem.2003.275.
Stahmer SA, Shofer FS, Marino A, Shepherd S, Abbuhl S. Do quantitative changes in pain intensity correlate with pain relief and satisfaction? Acad Emerg Med. 1998 Sep;5(9):851-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1998.tb02811.x.
FitzGerald G, Jelinek GA, Scott D, Gerdtz MF. Emergency department triage revisited. Emerg Med J. 2010 Feb;27(2):86-92. doi: 10.1136/emj.2009.077081.
Telfer P, Criddle J, Sandell J, Davies F, Morrison I, Challands J. Intranasal diamorphine for acute sickle cell pain. Arch Dis Child. 2009 Dec;94(12):979-80. doi: 10.1136/adc.2008.138875. Epub 2009 Mar 25.
France J, Smith S, Smith L. The College of Emergency Medicine Best Practice Guideline: Management of Pain in Adults. 2014.
Menendez ME, Bot AG, Hageman MG, Neuhaus V, Mudgal CS, Ring D. Computerized adaptive testing of psychological factors: relation to upper-extremity disability. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Oct 16;95(20):e149. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.01614.
Smith JE, Rockett M, Squire R, Hayward CJ, Creanor S, Ewings P, Barton A, Pritchard C, Benger JR. PAin SoluTions In the Emergency Setting (PASTIES); a protocol for two open-label randomised trials of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) versus routine care in the emergency department. BMJ Open. 2013 Feb 14;3(2):e002577. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002577. Print 2013.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
IRAS 210798
Identifier Type: OTHER
Identifier Source: secondary_id
0588
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.