Improving pediatric experience of pain during vaccinations: a quality improvement project
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to share lessons learned from a quality improvement (QI) project that studied pediatric pain assessment scores after implementing additional evidence-based pain mitigation strategies into practice. Most nurses will acknowledge they implement some practices to mitigate pain during injections. Addressing pain during vaccination is important to prevent needle fear, vaccine hesitancy and health care avoidance. The aim of this project was to reduce pain as evidenced by pain scores at the time of vaccination at the North Bay Nurse Practitioner-Led Clinic (NBNPLC). DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The design for this study was quasi-experimental utilizing descriptive statistics and QI tools. The NBNPLC utilized the model for improvement to test change ideas. A validated observation tool to assess pain during vaccination with the pediatric population (revised Face Legs Activity Cry and Consolability) was used to test changes. The team deliberately planned improvements according to best practice guidelines to optimize use of strategies to mitigate pain during injections. QI tools and leadership skills were utilized to improve the pediatric experience of pain during vaccinations. Parents and clinicians provided qualitative and quantitative feedback to the project. FINDINGS: Nurses tested pain assessment tools and agreed to use a validated tool to assess pain during vaccinations. Parents agreed to use of topical anesthetic during vaccinations. Improved pain scores during vaccinations were demonstrated with the use of topical anesthetic. Parents agreed to use of standardized sucrose solution during vaccination. Reduced pain scores were observed with the use of standardized sucrose water. To sustain implementation of the guideline, a nursing documentation form was devised with nurses agreeing to ongoing use of the form. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: This is a QI project that examined the intricacies of moving clinical practice guidelines into clinical practice. The project validates guidelines for pain management during vaccinations. Leaders within clinics who want to improve pediatric pain during vaccinations will find this paper helpful as a guide. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Pain management in the pediatric population will be touched on in the context of parental expectations of pain. QI tools, lessons learned and suggestions for nurses will be outlined. Leadership plays an influential role in translating practice guidelines into practice. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This paper outlines how organizational supports were instrumental to give clinicians time to deliberately challenge practice to improve quality of care of children during vaccinations.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».