Behavioral Pain Scale Scores Research Articles

Pain measurement in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: Behavioral Pain Scale versus Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool

PurposeThe Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) and Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) are behavioral pain assessment tools for uncommunicative and sedated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. This study compares the discriminant validation and reliability of the CPOT and the BPS, simultaneously, in mechanically ventilated patients on a mixed-adult ICU. Materials and methodsThis is a prospective observational cohort study in 68 mechanically ventilated medical ICU patients who were unable to report pain. ResultsThe BPS and CPOT scores showed a significant increase of 2 points between rest and the painful procedure (turning). The median BPS scores between rest and the nonpainful procedure (oral care) showed a significant increase of 1 point, whereas the median CPOT score remained unchanged. The interrater reliability of the BPS and CPOT scores showed a fair to good agreement (0.74 and 0.75, respectively). ConclusionsThis study showed that the BPS and the CPOT are reliable and valid for use in a daily clinical setting. Although both scores increased with a presumed painful stimulus, the discriminant validation of the BPS use was less supported because it increased during a nonpainful stimulus. The CPOT appears preferable in this particular group of patients, especially with regard to its discriminant validation.

Validity and reliability of behavioral pain scale in patients with low level of consciousness due to head trauma hospitalized in intensive care unit.

Background:Estimating pain in patients of intensive care unit (ICU) is essential, but because of their special situation, verbal scales cannot be used. Therefore, to estimate the level of pain, behavioral pain scale was developed by Payen in 2001.Objectives:The aim of this study was to investigate the validity and reliability of behavioral pain scale in patients with low level of consciousness due to head trauma hospitalized in ICU.Patients and Methods:This descriptive prospective study was performed in Yazd in 2013. In this study, fifty patients, including thirteen women and thirty seven men, were involved. To collect the data a questionnaire including demographic and Glasgow coma scale (GCS) information as well as a list of behavioral pain scale (BPS) were used. SPSS software (version 18) was used to analyze the data.Results:There was no significant difference in reliability proving of average score of BPS recorded by two day and night assessors (P > 5). Cronbach’s alpha was 85 for painful procedures and 76 for non-painful procedures. In addition, known groups’ technique (painful and non-painful procedures) was used to assess validity. The average scores were 7.75 during painful procedures and 3.28 during non-painful procedures (P = 0.001). The results stated that BPS scores during these two procedures were significantly different.Conclusions:BPS in patients with low level of consciousness due to head trauma has strong reliability and validity. Therefore, this scale can be used for patients hospitalized in ICU to assess the level of pain.

In Response

In Response Li et al.1 highlighted the inconsistency in Ramsay scores (RSs) of 8 patients in our study in relation to their sedation state (sedated or conscious sedated).2 This inconsistency was caused by normal changes in sedation levels in critically ill patients, which may fluctuate frequently during the day as Li et al. also stated. The RSs were rated in the morning (between 7:30 and 8:00 AM), whereas the pain assessments were completed between 8:00 AM and 12:00 noon. Thus, patients who are sedated at 8:00 AM can be fully awake at the time of pain assessment later in the morning, and vice versa. Therefore, in our study, the ability of patients to respond at the time of pain assessment was used for the classification of the patients instead of the RS at 8:00 AM, resulting in differences in the classification of 8 patients. Li et al. also questioned the reliability of the verbal rating scale (VRS-4) in patients who are conscious sedated. In our study, we sought to evaluate the use of the behavioral pain scale (BPS) in conscious sedated patients compared with deeply sedated patients, for whom the BPS was developed. BPS scores during painful procedures were significantly higher than those at rest in both sedated patients and conscious sedated patients. Furthermore, the internal consistency was comparable for observations in both groups, demonstrating similar homogeneity of the items. Therefore, it would seem that the BPS can detect and discriminate pain and is a valid measure of pain in both sedated and conscious sedated patients. However, we know from the literature that pain is often underestimated, when rated by the nurse.3 Furthermore, in a recent study,4 a combination of pain instruments was recommended when credibility of self-reporting is doubted. Observational measures such as the BPS capture behavior that is less subject to voluntary control and more automatic. Self-reporting also yields unique information, and primarily reflects expressive pain behavior that is under control of higher mental processes. We therefore also asked to score the pain by the patients using the VRS-4 and studied the correlation between the BPS and VRS-4. In this analysis, we observed a strong correlation between the BPS and VRS-4, thus implying that the patient's VRS-4 is of added value. Because the BPS may underrate or overrate patients' pain, we believe the BPS should be used in conjunction with the VRS-4, making the pain measurement as ideal as possible. Sabine Ahlers, Msc Department of Clinical Pharmacy St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, The Netherlands [email protected] Catherijne Knibbe, PharmD, PhD Department of Clinical Pharmacy St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, The Netherlands Division of Pharmacology Leiden/Amsterdam, The Netherlands Centre for Drug Research Leiden University Leiden, The Netherlands

The Use of the Behavioral Pain Scale to Assess Pain in Conscious Sedated Patients

Assessing pain in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients is a great challenge. There is a need for an adequate pain measurement tool for use in conscious sedated patients because of their questionable communicative abilities. In this study, we evaluated the use of the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) in conscious sedated patients in comparison with its use in deeply sedated patients, for whom the BPS was developed. Additionally, in conscious sedated patients, the combination of the BPS and the patient-rated Verbal Rating Scale (VRS-4) was evaluated. We performed a prospective evaluation study in 80 nonparalyzed critically ill adult intensive care unit patients. Over 2 mo, nurses performed 175 observation series: 126 in deeply sedated patients and 49 in conscious sedated patients. Each observation series consisted of BPS ratings (range 3-12) at 4 points: at rest, during a nonpainful procedure, at retest rest, and during a routine painful procedure. Patients in the conscious sedated state also self-reported their pain using the 4-point VRS-4. BPS scores during painful procedures were significantly higher than those at rest, both in deeply sedated patients (5.1 [4.8-5.5] vs 3.4 [3.3-3.5], respectively) and conscious sedated patients (5.4 [4.9-5.9] vs 3.8 [3.5-4.1], respectively) (mean [95% confidence interval]). For both groups, scores obtained during the nonpainful procedure and at rest did not significantly differ. There was a strong correlation between nurses' BPS ratings and conscious sedated patients' VRS-4 ratings during the painful procedure (r(s) = 0.67, P < 0.001). At rest and during nonpainful procedures, 98% of the observations were rated as acceptable pain (VRS 1 or 2) by both nurses and patients. During painful procedures, nurses rated the pain higher than patients did in 16% of the observations and lower in 12% of the observations. The BPS is a valid tool for measuring pain in conscious sedated patients during painful procedures. Thus, for noncommunicative and mechanically ventilated patients, it may be regarded as a bridge between the observational scale used by nurses and the VRS-4 used by patients who are able to self-report pain.

EMLA Cream and Nitrous Oxide to Alleviate Pain Induced by Palivizumab (Synagis) Intramuscular Injections in Infants and Young Children

Palivizumab (Synagis [Abbot Laboratories, Kent, United Kingdom]) is recommended for the prevention of severe lower respiratory tract infections caused by respiratory syncytial virus in infants at high risk. These injections are very painful, and currently the use of analgesics is not systematic. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of EMLA with premixed 50% nitrous oxide/oxygen, used alone or combined with EMLA, for pain alleviation during palivizumab injections. This randomized, double-blind, multicenter study included children who were younger than 24 months. Each child randomly received during the first 3 monthly injections 3 different analgesic interventions: (1) EMLA: application of EMLA plus air inhalation; (2) nitrous oxide/oxygen: inhalation of 50/50 nitrous oxide/oxygen plus application of a placebo cream; and (3) nitrous oxide/oxygen plus EMLA: inhalation of 50/50 nitrous oxide/oxygen plus application of EMLA. Each child was his or her own control. Procedural pain was assessed through videotapes with the Modified Behavioral Pain Scale. The procedure itself was subdivided in 2 periods: (1) injection and (2) recovery (first 30 seconds after the removal of the needle). Modified Behavioral Pain Scale scores over time (injection and recovery periods) and among treatments were compared by repeated-measures analysis of variance. Fifty-five children were included. Mean +/- SD Modified Behavioral Pain Scale pain scores for EMLA, nitrous oxide/oxygen, and nitrous oxide/oxygen plus EMLA were, respectively, 9.3 +/- 1.0, 8.8 +/- 1.2, and 8.2 +/- 1.8 during the injection and 7.8 +/- 1.7, 7.4 +/- 1.9, and 6.9 +/- 2.4 during the recovery period. A significant time and treatment effect in favor of the combined nitrous oxide/oxygen plus EMLA was observed. The administration of 50/50 nitrous oxide/oxygen to infants and young children is effective in decreasing the pain associated with palivizumab intramuscular injections. The combined nitrous oxide/oxygen plus EMLA cream was more effective than either EMLA cream or nitrous oxide/oxygen alone.

A Prospective Study of Pain at Rest: Incidence and Characteristics of an Unrecognized Symptom in Surgical and Trauma versus Medical Intensive Care Unit Patients

A Prospective Study of Pain at Rest: Incidence and Characteristics of an Unrecognized Symptom in Surgical and Trauma <i>versus</i> Medical Intensive Care Unit Patients

Validation of a Behavioral Pain Scale in Critically Ill, Sedated, and Mechanically Ventilated Patients

Assessing pain in critically ill patients, particularly in nonverbal patients, is a great challenge. In this study, we validated a behavioral pain scale (BPS) in critically ill, sedated, and mechanically ventilated patients. The BPS score was the sum of 3 subscales that have a range score of 1-4: facial expression, upper limb movements, and compliance with mechanical ventilation. Two assessors observed and scored pain simultaneously with the BPS at rest and during painful procedures. The psychometric properties of the BPS that were studied were reliability, validity, and responsiveness. We achieved 360 observations in 30 patients. The BPS was internally reliable (Cronbach alpha = 0.72). The intraclass correlation coefficient to evaluate inter-rater reliability was high (0.95). Validity was demonstrated by the change in BPS scores, which were significantly higher during painful procedures, with averages of 3.9 +/- 1.1 at rest and 6.8 +/- 1.9 during procedures (P < 0.001), and by the principal components factor analysis, which revealed a large first-factor accounting for 65% of the variance in pain expression. The BPS exhibited excellent responsiveness, with an effect size ranging from 2.2 to 3.4. This study demonstrated that the BPS can be valid and reliable for measuring pain in noncommunicative intensive care unit patients.

Remifentanil versus fentanyl for short‐term analgesia‐based sedation in mechanically ventilated postoperative children

Analgesia-based sedation techniques are becoming more established in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting. The aim of this study was to compare remifentanil and fentanyl infusions for postoperative analgesia in pediatric ICU patients. After receiving ethical committee approval, a prospective randomized, double-blind study was performed. Twenty-two postoperative orthopedic surgery patients received either remifentanil 0.1 microg.kg(-1).min(-1) or fentanyl 0.025 microg.kg(-1).min(-1) infusions diluted to the same volume. Analgesic infusion was titrated to predefined levels of analgesia [behavioral pain scale (BPS) score of 3]. Propofol was added if sedation was unsatisfactory after BPS score 3 had been achieved. There were no differences in groups regarding demographics, tracheal extubation times, and pain scores of the patients. After cessation of the opioid infusion, the sedation scores and the heart rates were always higher in the remifentanil group compared with the fentanyl group. The incidences of nausea, vomiting, apnea, desaturation, reintubation within 24 h and constipation were also similar between the two groups. We conclude that a remifentanil infusion provides clinically comparable analgesia with a fentanyl infusion in mechanically ventilated postoperative pediatric patients. These two drugs are suitable for short-term analgesia-based sedation in pediatric postoperative ICU patients.

Assessing pain in critically ill sedated patients by using a behavioral pain scale.

To establish the validity and reliability of a new behavioral pain scale (BPS) for critically ill sedated adult patients. Prospective evaluation. Ten-bed trauma and surgical intensive care unit in a university teaching hospital. Thirty mechanically ventilated patients who were receiving analgesia and sedation. Assessments with the BPS were completed consecutively at standardized times (morning, afternoon, night) by pairs of evaluators (nurse and nurse's aide). They collected physiologic parameters and BPS results before and during care procedures: non-nociceptive (group 1, compression stockings application and central venous catheter dressing change), nociceptive (group 2, endotracheal suctioning and mobilization), and retested nociceptive (group 3). The BPS score was the sum of three items that had a range score of 1-4: facial expression, movements of upper limbs, and compliance with mechanical ventilation. Two hundred and sixty nine assessments were completed, including 104, 134, and 31 measurements in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. There was no difference in Ramsay scale scores between the three groups (Ramsay 4-6). Nociceptive stimulations (group 2) resulted in significantly higher BPS values than non-nociceptive ones (group 1, 4.9 vs. 3.5, p <.01), whereas the two groups had comparable BPS values before stimulation (3.1 vs. 3.0). A trend was found in group 2 between the dosage of sedation/analgesia and BPS: the higher the dosage, the lower BPS values and BPS changes to nociceptive stimulation. Group 3 had BPS values similar to group 2 at rest (3.2 vs. 3.2) and during the procedure (4.4 vs. 4.5), with good interrater correlations (r(2) =.71 and.50, respectively). These results indicate that the expression of pain can be scored validly and reliably by using the BPS in sedated, mechanically ventilated patients. Further studies are warranted regarding the utility of the BPS in making clinical decisions about the use of analgesic drugs in the intensive care unit.

Lidocaine-prilocaine patch decreases the pain associated with the subcutaneous administration of measles-mumps-rubella vaccine but does not adversely affect the antibody response

Topical lidocaine 2.5% and prilocaine 2.5% (EMLA) is effective in decreasing the pain associated with minor procedures including immunization, although the effect on the antibody response to vaccine constituents has not been assessed. To measure the antibody response to measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine, as well as pain reduction associated with the use of the EMLA patch. One hundred sixty healthy infants at least 12 months old undergoing their first MM immunization in an ambulatory setting. Randomized, double-blind, controlled trial of EMLA patch (5%-1 g) or placebo before MMR immunization. Blood sampling before and 28 to 35 days after immunization. The primary outcome measure was the antibody response to measles by plaque reduction neutralization and to mumps and rubella by enzyme immunoassay. The secondary outcomes were pain scores by the Modified Behavioral Pain Scale and drug- and vaccine-associated adverse events. There was no difference in the antibody response between the EMLA- and placebo-treated groups. The response rates in the EMLA group were 89.7%, 88.3%, and 92.3% to measles, mumps, and rubella, respectively, compared with rates of 91.1%, 94.9%, and 93.7% in the placebo group (P >.05 for all comparisons). EMLA recipients had less pain after immunization (mean Modified Behavioral Pain Scale score increase 3.1 compared with 3.8; P =.043) and less irritability (16% compared with 31%; P =.040) than did placebo recipients. The EMLA patch has no adverse effect on the antibody response to MMR vaccine and significantly reduces the pain associated with the subcutaneous administration of the vaccine.