2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/165642
Category:
Abstract
Type:
Presentation
Title:
When is Relief From Cancer Pain Poor, Fair, or Good?
Author(s):
Miaskowski, Christine; Paul, S.; West, Claudia; Dodd, M.; Lee, K.
Author Details:
Christine Miaskowski, PhD, Professor, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA, email: chris.miaskowski@nursing.ucsf; S. Paul; Claudia West; M. Dodd; K. Lee
Abstract:
Previous work by Cleeland and colleagues delineated different levels of cancer pain severity (mild = 1 to 4, moderate = 5 to 6, and severe = 7 to 10). However, no work has been done to determine if a similar approach could be used to delineate different levels of pain relief. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine if pain relief could be classified into three groupings (i.e., poor, fair, good) based on pain's level of interference with functioning. We hypothesized that clinically important differences in pain relief would be associated with large differences in self-reported interference with functioning. Six cutpoints were tested using the technique of multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). The criteria used to determine the optimal boundaries was that a MANOVA among relief categories yielded the largest F ratio for the between category effect on the 7 interference items. Patients (n=195) with pain from bone metastasis completed the pain interference scale from the Brief Pain Inventory and rated the amount of pain relief that they were experiencing from their current analgesic regimen using a 0% (no relief) to 100% (complete relief) numeric rating scale. The majority of the patients were female (70.7%) and Caucasian (83.3%) with a mean age of 59.4 years. Mean average and worst pain intensity scores were 4.2 and 6.7, respectively. The mean pain relief score was 66.2. The MANOVA indicated that the optimal set of cutpoints among pain relief levels was 0% to 60% (poor), 70% to 80% (fair), and 90% to 100% (good). While this analysis is based on one homogeneous sample of patients with pain from bone metastasis, understanding cutpoints for pain relief may be beneficial to clinicians in helping to establish differences in pain relief that correspond to clinically significant changes in patients' ability to perform various activities.
Repository Posting Date:
27-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
27-Oct-2011
Conference Date:
2003
Conference Name:
28th Annual Oncology Nursing Society Congress
Conference Host:
Oncology Nursing Society
Conference Location:
Denver, Colorado, USA
Note:
This is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.type.categoryAbstracten_US
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleWhen is Relief From Cancer Pain Poor, Fair, or Good?en_GB
dc.contributor.authorMiaskowski, Christineen_US
dc.contributor.authorPaul, S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorWest, Claudiaen_US
dc.contributor.authorDodd, M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorLee, K.en_US
dc.author.detailsChristine Miaskowski, PhD, Professor, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA, email: chris.miaskowski@nursing.ucsf; S. Paul; Claudia West; M. Dodd; K. Leeen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/165642-
dc.description.abstractPrevious work by Cleeland and colleagues delineated different levels of cancer pain severity (mild = 1 to 4, moderate = 5 to 6, and severe = 7 to 10). However, no work has been done to determine if a similar approach could be used to delineate different levels of pain relief. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine if pain relief could be classified into three groupings (i.e., poor, fair, good) based on pain's level of interference with functioning. We hypothesized that clinically important differences in pain relief would be associated with large differences in self-reported interference with functioning. Six cutpoints were tested using the technique of multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). The criteria used to determine the optimal boundaries was that a MANOVA among relief categories yielded the largest F ratio for the between category effect on the 7 interference items. Patients (n=195) with pain from bone metastasis completed the pain interference scale from the Brief Pain Inventory and rated the amount of pain relief that they were experiencing from their current analgesic regimen using a 0% (no relief) to 100% (complete relief) numeric rating scale. The majority of the patients were female (70.7%) and Caucasian (83.3%) with a mean age of 59.4 years. Mean average and worst pain intensity scores were 4.2 and 6.7, respectively. The mean pain relief score was 66.2. The MANOVA indicated that the optimal set of cutpoints among pain relief levels was 0% to 60% (poor), 70% to 80% (fair), and 90% to 100% (good). While this analysis is based on one homogeneous sample of patients with pain from bone metastasis, understanding cutpoints for pain relief may be beneficial to clinicians in helping to establish differences in pain relief that correspond to clinically significant changes in patients' ability to perform various activities.en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-27T12:22:21Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-27en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-27T12:22:21Z-
dc.conference.date2003en_US
dc.conference.name28th Annual Oncology Nursing Society Congressen_US
dc.conference.hostOncology Nursing Societyen_US
dc.conference.locationDenver, Colorado, USAen_US
dc.description.noteThis is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.-
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.