Dataset Information

Provincial legislative and regulatory standards for pain assessment and management in long-term care homes: a scoping review and in-depth case analysis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Among Canadian residents living in long-term care (LTC) facilities, and especially among those with limited ability to communicate due to dementia, pain remains underassessed and undermanaged. Although evidence-based clinical guidelines for the assessment and management of pain exist, these clinical guidelines are not widely implemented in LTC facilities. A relatively unexplored avenue for change is the influence that statutes and regulations could exert on pain practices within LTC. This review is therefore aimed at identifying the current landscape of policy levers used across Canada to assess and manage pain among LTC residents and to evaluate the extent to which they are concordant with evidence-based clinical guidelines proposed by an international consensus group consisting of both geriatric pain and public policy experts. METHODS:Using scoping review methodology, a search for peer-reviewed journal articles and government documents pertaining to pain in Canadian LTC facilities was carried out. This scoping review was complemented by an in-depth case analysis of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario statutes and regulations. RESULTS:Across provinces, pain was highly prevalent and was associated with adverse consequences among LTC residents. The considerable benefits of using a standardized pain assessment protocol, along with the barriers in implementing such a protocol, were identified. For most provinces, pain assessment and management in LTC residents was not specifically addressed in their statutes or regulations. In Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario, regulations mandate the use of the interRAI suite of assessment tools for the assessment and reporting of pain. CONCLUSION:The prevalence of pain and the benefits of implementing standardized pain assessment protocols has been reported in the research literature. Despite occasional references to pain, however, existing regulations do not recommend assessments of pain at the frequency specified by experts. Insufficient direction on the use of specialized pain assessment tools (especially in the case of those with limited ability to communicate) that minimize reliance on subjective judgements was also identified in current regulations. Existing policies therefore fail to adequately address the underassessment and undermanagement of pain in older adults residing in LTC facilities in ways that are aligned with expert consensus.

SUBMITTER: Gallant NL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7650170 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Provincial legislative and regulatory standards for pain assessment and management in long-term care homes: a scoping review and in-depth case analysis.

Gallant Natasha L NL Peckham Allie A Marchildon Gregory G Hadjistavropoulos Thomas T Roblin Blair B Stopyn Rhonda J N RJN

BMC geriatrics 20201109 1

<h4>Background</h4>Among Canadian residents living in long-term care (LTC) facilities, and especially among those with limited ability to communicate due to dementia, pain remains underassessed and undermanaged. Although evidence-based clinical guidelines for the assessment and management of pain exist, these clinical guidelines are not widely implemented in LTC facilities. A relatively unexplored avenue for change is the influence that statutes and regulations could exert on pain practices with ...[more]

PMID: 33167897

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInternationally, 2-5% of people live in residential or nursing homes, many with multi-morbidities, including severe cognitive impairment. Pain is frequently considered an expected part of old age and morbidity, and may often be either under-reported by care home residents, or go unrecognized by care staff. We conducted a systematic scoping review to explore the complexity of pain recognition, assessment and treatment for residents living in care homes, and to understand the contexts that might influence its management.MethodsScoping review using the methodological framework of Levac and colleagues. Articles were included if they examined pain assessment and/or management, for care or nursing home residents. We searched Medline, CINAHL, ASSIA, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar; reference lists were also screened, and website searches carried out of key organisations. Conversations with 16 local care home managers were included to gain an understanding of their perspective.ResultsInclusion criteria were met by 109 studies. Three overarching themes were identified: Staff factors and beliefs - in relation to pain assessment and management (e.g. experience, qualifications) and beliefs and perceptions relating to pain. Pain assessment - including use of pain assessment tools and assessment/management for residents with cognitive impairment. Interventions - including efficacy/effects (pharmaceutical/non pharmaceutical), and pain training interventions and their outcomes. Overall findings from the review indicated a lack of training and staff confidence in relation to pain assessment and management. This was particularly the case for residents with dementia.ConclusionsFurther training and detailed guidelines for the appropriate assessment and treatment of pain are required by care home staff. Professionals external to the care home environment need to be aware of the issues facing care homes staff and residents in order to target their input in the most appropriate way.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Nursing home (NH) residents experience a high burden of chronic disease. Chronic disease management (CDM) can be a challenge, as the context of care provision and the way care is provided impact care delivery. This scoping review aimed to identify types of chronic diseases studied in intervention studies in NHs, influential contextual factors addressed by interventions and future CDM research considerations. DESIGN:The scoping review followed guidelines by Arksey and O'Malley (2005) and Levac, Colquhoun and O'Brien (2010). Six reviewers screened citations for inclusion. Data extraction was performed by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer. DATA SOURCES:We searched four databases: CINAHL, EMBASE, PubMed and Scopus, in March 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:Studies were included if (1) aim of intervention was to improve CDM, (2) intervention incorporated the chronic care model (CCM), (3) included NH residents, (4) analysed the efficacy of the intervention and (5) sample included adults over age 65 years. Studies were limited to English or French language and to those published after 1996, when the CCM was first conceptualised. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Extracted information included the type of chronic disease, the type and number of CCM model components used in the intervention, the method of delivery of the intervention, and outcomes. RESULTS:On completion of the review of 11?917 citations, 13 studies were included. Most interventions targeted residents living with dementia. There was significant heterogeneity noted among designs, outcomes, and type and complexity of intervention components. There was little evaluation of the sustainability of interventions, including feasibility. CONCLUSIONS:Research was heavily focused on management of dementia. The most commonly included CCM components were multidisciplinary care, evidence-based care, coordinated care and clinical information systems. Future research should include subjective and objective outcomes, which are meaningful for NH residents, for common chronic diseases.

Project description:BackgroundCaring for older persons has become a global necessity to ensure functional ability and healthy ageing. It is of paramount importance that standards of care are monitored, especially for older persons who live in long term care facilities (LTCF). We, therefore, scoped and summarised evidence relating to standards and the quality of care for older persons in LTCFs in gerontological literature globally.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review using Askey and O'Malley's framework, including Levac et al. recommendations. PubMed, CINAHL, Health Sources, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched with no date limitation up to May 2020 using keywords, Boolean terms, and medical subject headings. We also consulted the World Health Organization website and the reference list of included articles for evidence sources. This review also included peer-reviewed publications and grey literature in English that focused on standards and quality of care for older residents in LTCFs. Two reviewers independently screened the title, abstract, and full-text of evidence sources screening stages and performed the data extraction. Thematic content analysis was used, and a summary of the findings are reported narratively.ResultsSixteen evidence sources published from 1989 to 2017 met this study's eligibility criteria out of 73,845 citations obtained from the broader search. The majority of the studies were conducted in the USA 56% (9/16), and others were from Canada, Hong Kong, Ireland, Norway, Israel, Japan, and France. The included studies presented evidence on the effectiveness of prompted voiding intervention for urinary incontinence in LTCFs (37.5%), the efficacy of professional support to LTCF staff (18.8%), and the prevention-effectiveness of a pressure ulcer programme in LTCFs (6.3%). Others presented evidence on regulation and quality of care (12.5%); nursing documentation and quality of care (6.3%); medical, nursing, and psychosocial standards on the quality of care (6.3%); medication safety using the Beer criteria (6.3%); and the quality of morning care provision (6.3%).ConclusionThis study suggests most studies relating to standards and quality of care in LTCFs focus on effectiveness of interventions, few on people-centredness and safety, and are mainly conducted in European countries and the United States of America. Future studies on people-centerdness, safety, and geographical settings with limited or no evidence are recommended.

Dataset Information

Provincial legislative and regulatory standards for pain assessment and management in long-term care homes: a scoping review and in-depth case analysis.

Publications

Provincial legislative and regulatory standards for pain assessment and management in long-term care homes: a scoping review and in-depth case analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets