Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-26 @ 2:43 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2025-12-26 @ 2:43 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT03127306
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2017-09-20
First Post:
2017-04-20
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
False
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Validation of the Polish Version of BPS (POL-BPS).
Sponsor:
Pomeranian Medical University Szczecin
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Validation of the Polish Version of the Behavioral Pain Scale in a Postoperative Cardiac Surgery Unit.
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2017-09
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
POL-BPS
Brief Summary:
Between 40 to 70% of patients with critical illness experience moderate to severe pain. Diagnosing pain and assessing its severity is difficult in non-verbal patients both in an Intensive Care Unit and in Postoperative Unit after a major surgery such as cardiac surgery). In patients who are unable to self-report pain, we use behavioural pain scales, namely BPS - Behavioural Pain Scale.
Aim: The aim of this study was to validate the Polish version of a behavioural pain assessment method - BPS in intubated, sedated patients after cardiac surgery versus self assessment of pain using Numeric rating scale (NRS) in both delirious and non-delirious patients (assessed using Confusion Assessment Method for ICU, CAM-ICU).
Method: A prospective observational cohort study will include 60 patients. The patients will be observed by two trained observers during a nociceptive procedure (position change), both during analgosedation and analgesia. Patients will be observed 5 minutes before, during, and 15 min after the two sets of interventions (six assessments in total). Each BPS assessment will be carried out by two observers blinded to each other. To validate the Polish BPS translation we will use the following methods: calculations of interrater reliability, criterion validity and discriminant validity.
Aim: The aim of this study was to validate the Polish version of a behavioural pain assessment method - BPS in intubated, sedated patients after cardiac surgery versus self assessment of pain using Numeric rating scale (NRS) in both delirious and non-delirious patients (assessed using Confusion Assessment Method for ICU, CAM-ICU).
Method: A prospective observational cohort study will include 60 patients. The patients will be observed by two trained observers during a nociceptive procedure (position change), both during analgosedation and analgesia. Patients will be observed 5 minutes before, during, and 15 min after the two sets of interventions (six assessments in total). Each BPS assessment will be carried out by two observers blinded to each other. To validate the Polish BPS translation we will use the following methods: calculations of interrater reliability, criterion validity and discriminant validity.
Detailed Description:
Patients after major surgery, namely cardiac surgery frequently suffer pain during their postoperative stay in the intensive care unit. Nearly 30% of those patients experience pain at rest and up to 50% experience pain during nursing procedures. Pain experienced by critically ill patients falls into four categories that coexist and overlap: pre-existing chronic pain, acute illness-related pain, continuous ICU treatment-related pain or discomfort and intermittent procedural pain. Moreover, acute pain experienced in the ICU may become a chronic problem after discharge from the unit, as a lifelong ICU footprint. Everyday nursing procedures, including position changing performed in the ICU may be a potential source of pain, therefore there is a clinical need for a simple and easy behavioural pain scale to evaluate this condition in patients unable to self assess pain.
Assessment of pain in patients treated in the ICU becomes a daily clinical challenge for the ICU team, also in those units where minimal sedation environment based on analgesia are used. Various guidelines and recommendations exist to guide the ICU care team in the pain management and assessment process. Nevertheless, the gold standard for pain assessment is patient's self-report of pain (using numeric raing scale - NRS), which can be aided with behavioural scales only when the self-report is unreliable or impossible to obtain. Observational pain scales include the Behavioural Pain Scale (BPS) and have been recommended for clinical use in the critically ill adults. However, their validation in a given patient population (cardiac, burn, different languages) is strongly recommended and required.
The need to equip critical care teams (intensive care units - ICUs, high dependency unit - HDUs, Post-Operative Units) with dedicated monitoring tools is clear. The BPS has been developed by critical care professionals and validated in various situations, but it has not been translated or validated in Polish until now.
Assessment of pain in patients treated in the ICU becomes a daily clinical challenge for the ICU team, also in those units where minimal sedation environment based on analgesia are used. Various guidelines and recommendations exist to guide the ICU care team in the pain management and assessment process. Nevertheless, the gold standard for pain assessment is patient's self-report of pain (using numeric raing scale - NRS), which can be aided with behavioural scales only when the self-report is unreliable or impossible to obtain. Observational pain scales include the Behavioural Pain Scale (BPS) and have been recommended for clinical use in the critically ill adults. However, their validation in a given patient population (cardiac, burn, different languages) is strongly recommended and required.
The need to equip critical care teams (intensive care units - ICUs, high dependency unit - HDUs, Post-Operative Units) with dedicated monitoring tools is clear. The BPS has been developed by critical care professionals and validated in various situations, but it has not been translated or validated in Polish until now.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: