MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4417006002 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-2592

Pediatric sickle cell outpatient pain management: A quality improvement initiative

2025· article· en· W4417006002 sur OpenAlexaff
Anne L. Harvey, Sara M. Dryden, Katie Gradick, Sarah Schear, Rachel Kupferman, Michele De Leon Juaregui, Menaka Pai, Sasidhar Goteti

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders
Établissements canadiensMcMaster University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésQuality managementEmergency departmentPDCAPain managementMEDLINEQuality of life (healthcare)Vaso-occlusive crisisPatient satisfactionOutpatient clinic

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Primary Children's Hospital (PCH) is a 289-bed tertiary care children's teaching hospital in Utah, caring for approximately 50 patients with sickle cell disease (SCD). Pediatric patients with SCD report frequent experiences of pain yet face barriers to equitable care and adequate pain management. Formal, individualized pain plans have been shown to reduce time to treatment, improve quality of care, and decrease hospital length of stay; they are a promising tool to improve health equity and reduce patient suffering. This quality improvement project aims to improve individualized pain management and caregiver confidence in managing patients with SCD at a single academic hospital, through the implementation of guideline-driven pain plans. Objective: Our objective was to employ the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) quality improvement (QI) methodology to: 1. Create individualized vaso-occlusive (VOC) pain plans for all patients with SCD; 2. Increase calls to clinic to obtain recommendations for pain management by 10% from baseline; 3. Decrease visits to the emergency department (ED) for pain management by 10% from baseline. Methods: An interdisciplinary team of palliative care and hematology providers were assembled to develop national guideline-driven, individualized, comprehensive home pain plans for all patients with SCD at Primary Children's Hospital. We surveyed hematology team members to determine reasons for increased ED utilization for pain episodes, and decreased calls to clinic and visits to the ED to manage pain episodes. A Pareto chart and fishbone diagram of these data identified two key barriers: 1. Lack of individualized home pain plans; and 2. Caregiver awareness of home plan implementation. PDSA Cycle 1 was the implementation of an individualized pain management plan at home. Baseline data was collected on the frequency of calls to the clinic for pain management and ED visits for pain management for each patient over two years before pain plan implementation. PDSA Cycle 2 was a reminder phone call to caregivers of patients who had individualized home pain plans. During the phone call, inquiries were also made about medication requirements and the utility of using the pain plan at home. The outcome measures for PDSA Cycles 1 and 2 were mean calls to clinic per month and mean visits to PCH ED for pain management. QI Macros (KnowWare International) was used for statistical analysis. This work was done under the auspices of the American Society of Hematology's Quality Improvement Training Institute. Results: Between December 2022 and July 2025, the percentage of SCD patients at PCH with individualized pain management plans increased from 0% to 94% (n=46). Using Special Processing Control charts, the mean baseline rate for calls to the clinic was 0.8 per month. After PDSA 1, this remained at 0.8 per month, and after PDSA 2, this increased to 2.7 per month. The baseline rate for ER visits was 2.1 per month. After PDSA cycle 1, the rate decreased to 1.5 per month, and after PDSA cycle 2, the rate decreased to 1.4 per month. 67% of caregivers (n=26) were successfully contacted and surveyed about their awareness and utilization of their child's pain plan during PDSA 2. 62% (n=16) of caregivers surveyed reported they had their child's pain plan, while 38% did not recall an individualized plan. Of those who had experienced pain since their last clinic visit, 63% reported using the pain plan to guide management and found it helpful. Conclusions: Using an interdisciplinary approach and a standard process during routine visits and at hospital discharge, we implemented VOC pain plans in 94% of patients with SCD at our pediatric hospital. An extensive pain plan discussion during clinic visits followed by reminder calls improved our mean calls to the clinic from 0.8 per month to 2.7 per month. Similarly, ED visits decreased from 2.1 per month to 1.4 per month. When used by caregivers, individualized pain plans helped guide patients and caregivers to manage their pain at home. Managing pain at home has the potential to reduce calls to the clinic for guidance, reduce visits to the clinic or ED for pain management, and potentially decrease hospital admissions for patients with SCD. Future expansion of this quality initiative will include implementation of ED pain plans, translation of pain plans into different languages, and incorporation of pain call logs to better capture the nature of each pain episode consistently.

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,033
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,033
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,173

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0330,025
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0030,002
Science ouverte0,0020,004
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,249
Écart entre enseignants0,240 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders→Travaux en français237 207→