Pain behaviors observed during six common procedures: Results from Thunder Project II

Kathleen A. Puntillo, Ann B. Morris, Carol L. Thompson, Julie Stanik-Hutt, Cheri A. White, Lorie R. Wild

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: Patients frequently display behaviors during procedures that may be pain related. Clinicians often rely on the patient's demonstration of behaviors as a cue to presence of pain. The purpose of this study was to identify specific pain-related behaviors and factors that predict the degree of behavioral responses during the following procedures: turning, central venous catheter insertion, wound drain removal, wound care, tracheal suctioning, and femoral sheath removal. Design: Prospective, descriptive study. Setting: Multiple units in 169 hospitals in United States, Canada, England, and Australia. Patients: A total of 5,957 adult patients who underwent one of the six procedures. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: A 30-item behavior observation tool was used to note patients' behaviors before and during a procedure. By comparing behaviors exhibited before and during the procedure as well as behaviors in those with and without procedural pain (as noted on a 0-10 numeric rating scale), we identified specific procedural pain behaviors: grimacing, rigidity, wincing, shutting of eyes, verbalization, moaning, and clenching of fists. On average, there were significantly more behaviors exhibited by patients with vs. without procedural pain (3.5 vs. 1.8 behaviors; t = 38.3, df = 5072.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-1.8). Patients with procedural pain were at least three times more likely to have increased behavioral responses than patients without procedural pain. A simultaneous regression model determined that 33% of the variance in amount of pain behaviors exhibited during a procedure was explained by three factors: degree of procedural pain intensity, degree of procedural distress, and undergoing the turning procedure. Conclusions: Because of the strong relationship between procedural pain and behavioral responses, clinicians can use behavioral responses of verbal and nonverbal patients to plan for, implement, and evaluate analgesic interventions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)421-427
Number of pages7
JournalCritical Care Medicine
Volume32
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2004

Fingerprint

Pain
Central Venous Catheters
Wounds and Injuries
Thigh
England
Canada
Cues
Analgesics
Prospective Studies
Confidence Intervals

Keywords

  • Acute care
  • Acute pain
  • Pain behaviors
  • Procedural pain
  • Procedures
  • Thunder project II

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

Puntillo, K. A., Morris, A. B., Thompson, C. L., Stanik-Hutt, J., White, C. A., & Wild, L. R. (2004). Pain behaviors observed during six common procedures: Results from Thunder Project II. Critical Care Medicine, 32(2), 421-427. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.CCM.0000108875.35298.D2

Pain behaviors observed during six common procedures : Results from Thunder Project II. / Puntillo, Kathleen A.; Morris, Ann B.; Thompson, Carol L.; Stanik-Hutt, Julie; White, Cheri A.; Wild, Lorie R.

In: Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 32, No. 2, 02.2004, p. 421-427.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Puntillo, KA, Morris, AB, Thompson, CL, Stanik-Hutt, J, White, CA & Wild, LR 2004, 'Pain behaviors observed during six common procedures: Results from Thunder Project II', Critical Care Medicine, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 421-427. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.CCM.0000108875.35298.D2
Puntillo, Kathleen A. ; Morris, Ann B. ; Thompson, Carol L. ; Stanik-Hutt, Julie ; White, Cheri A. ; Wild, Lorie R. / Pain behaviors observed during six common procedures : Results from Thunder Project II. In: Critical Care Medicine. 2004 ; Vol. 32, No. 2. pp. 421-427.
@article{0561c547a306490290792ab3044ebc15,
title = "Pain behaviors observed during six common procedures: Results from Thunder Project II",
abstract = "Objective: Patients frequently display behaviors during procedures that may be pain related. Clinicians often rely on the patient's demonstration of behaviors as a cue to presence of pain. The purpose of this study was to identify specific pain-related behaviors and factors that predict the degree of behavioral responses during the following procedures: turning, central venous catheter insertion, wound drain removal, wound care, tracheal suctioning, and femoral sheath removal. Design: Prospective, descriptive study. Setting: Multiple units in 169 hospitals in United States, Canada, England, and Australia. Patients: A total of 5,957 adult patients who underwent one of the six procedures. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: A 30-item behavior observation tool was used to note patients' behaviors before and during a procedure. By comparing behaviors exhibited before and during the procedure as well as behaviors in those with and without procedural pain (as noted on a 0-10 numeric rating scale), we identified specific procedural pain behaviors: grimacing, rigidity, wincing, shutting of eyes, verbalization, moaning, and clenching of fists. On average, there were significantly more behaviors exhibited by patients with vs. without procedural pain (3.5 vs. 1.8 behaviors; t = 38.3, df = 5072.5; 95{\%} confidence interval, 1.6-1.8). Patients with procedural pain were at least three times more likely to have increased behavioral responses than patients without procedural pain. A simultaneous regression model determined that 33{\%} of the variance in amount of pain behaviors exhibited during a procedure was explained by three factors: degree of procedural pain intensity, degree of procedural distress, and undergoing the turning procedure. Conclusions: Because of the strong relationship between procedural pain and behavioral responses, clinicians can use behavioral responses of verbal and nonverbal patients to plan for, implement, and evaluate analgesic interventions.",
keywords = "Acute care, Acute pain, Pain behaviors, Procedural pain, Procedures, Thunder project II",
author = "Puntillo, {Kathleen A.} and Morris, {Ann B.} and Thompson, {Carol L.} and Julie Stanik-Hutt and White, {Cheri A.} and Wild, {Lorie R.}",
year = "2004",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1097/01.CCM.0000108875.35298.D2",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "421--427",
journal = "Critical Care Medicine",
issn = "0090-3493",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pain behaviors observed during six common procedures

T2 - Results from Thunder Project II

AU - Puntillo, Kathleen A.

AU - Morris, Ann B.

AU - Thompson, Carol L.

AU - Stanik-Hutt, Julie

AU - White, Cheri A.

AU - Wild, Lorie R.

PY - 2004/2

Y1 - 2004/2

N2 - Objective: Patients frequently display behaviors during procedures that may be pain related. Clinicians often rely on the patient's demonstration of behaviors as a cue to presence of pain. The purpose of this study was to identify specific pain-related behaviors and factors that predict the degree of behavioral responses during the following procedures: turning, central venous catheter insertion, wound drain removal, wound care, tracheal suctioning, and femoral sheath removal. Design: Prospective, descriptive study. Setting: Multiple units in 169 hospitals in United States, Canada, England, and Australia. Patients: A total of 5,957 adult patients who underwent one of the six procedures. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: A 30-item behavior observation tool was used to note patients' behaviors before and during a procedure. By comparing behaviors exhibited before and during the procedure as well as behaviors in those with and without procedural pain (as noted on a 0-10 numeric rating scale), we identified specific procedural pain behaviors: grimacing, rigidity, wincing, shutting of eyes, verbalization, moaning, and clenching of fists. On average, there were significantly more behaviors exhibited by patients with vs. without procedural pain (3.5 vs. 1.8 behaviors; t = 38.3, df = 5072.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-1.8). Patients with procedural pain were at least three times more likely to have increased behavioral responses than patients without procedural pain. A simultaneous regression model determined that 33% of the variance in amount of pain behaviors exhibited during a procedure was explained by three factors: degree of procedural pain intensity, degree of procedural distress, and undergoing the turning procedure. Conclusions: Because of the strong relationship between procedural pain and behavioral responses, clinicians can use behavioral responses of verbal and nonverbal patients to plan for, implement, and evaluate analgesic interventions.

AB - Objective: Patients frequently display behaviors during procedures that may be pain related. Clinicians often rely on the patient's demonstration of behaviors as a cue to presence of pain. The purpose of this study was to identify specific pain-related behaviors and factors that predict the degree of behavioral responses during the following procedures: turning, central venous catheter insertion, wound drain removal, wound care, tracheal suctioning, and femoral sheath removal. Design: Prospective, descriptive study. Setting: Multiple units in 169 hospitals in United States, Canada, England, and Australia. Patients: A total of 5,957 adult patients who underwent one of the six procedures. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: A 30-item behavior observation tool was used to note patients' behaviors before and during a procedure. By comparing behaviors exhibited before and during the procedure as well as behaviors in those with and without procedural pain (as noted on a 0-10 numeric rating scale), we identified specific procedural pain behaviors: grimacing, rigidity, wincing, shutting of eyes, verbalization, moaning, and clenching of fists. On average, there were significantly more behaviors exhibited by patients with vs. without procedural pain (3.5 vs. 1.8 behaviors; t = 38.3, df = 5072.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-1.8). Patients with procedural pain were at least three times more likely to have increased behavioral responses than patients without procedural pain. A simultaneous regression model determined that 33% of the variance in amount of pain behaviors exhibited during a procedure was explained by three factors: degree of procedural pain intensity, degree of procedural distress, and undergoing the turning procedure. Conclusions: Because of the strong relationship between procedural pain and behavioral responses, clinicians can use behavioral responses of verbal and nonverbal patients to plan for, implement, and evaluate analgesic interventions.

KW - Acute care

KW - Acute pain

KW - Pain behaviors

KW - Procedural pain

KW - Procedures

KW - Thunder project II

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=1242275138&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=1242275138&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/01.CCM.0000108875.35298.D2

DO - 10.1097/01.CCM.0000108875.35298.D2

M3 - Article

C2 - 14758158

AN - SCOPUS:1242275138

VL - 32

SP - 421

EP - 427

JO - Critical Care Medicine

JF - Critical Care Medicine

SN - 0090-3493

IS - 2

ER -