191: Pediatric Pain Management: the Emergency Medicine Residents' Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pain is a component of up to 80% of all emergency department (ED) visits. Oligoanalgesia, the under-treatment of pain, is a recognized problem in the ED and can have numerous detrimental effects for the pediatric patient. Surveying emergency medicine residents, our primary objectives were to describe a) the extent and type of training received in pediatric acute pain management, b) their management approach to common painful pediatric presentations, c) their level of comfort in assessing and treating acute pain, d) their perceived facilitators and barriers to optimally managing pain, and e) their attitudes towards managing such pain in the ED. A descriptive, cross-sectional survey was administered to all Royal College Emergency Medicine (EM) and Pediatric Emergency Medicine (PEM) residents, the Canadian College of Family Physician's EM residents, Clinical Fellows and PEM Fellows at three Canadian universities. A novel survey tool was created and distributed from May to June 2013. Surveys were completed online, using a modified Dillman approach. Our response rate was 46% (56 of 122). Forty-five percent (25 of 55) of residents had not received any training for pediatric pain assessment. All years of residents were uncomfortable with the assessment of pain in 0- to 2-year-olds (P=0.07). For patients aged two to 12 years, level of comfort with pain assessment increased with years of training (P=0.02). When assessing pain in children with disabilities, 83% (45 of 54) of residents were ‘extremely’ or ‘somewhat’ uncomfortable; 65% (47 of 55) of residents had not received any training on how to assess pain for such patients. Sixty-nine percent (38 of 55) of residents had received training on how to treat pediatric pain. All residents were more comfortable using pain medication for a nine-year-old, as compared to a one-year-old (oral oxycodone P=0.00003, oral morphine P=0.00002, IV morphine P=0.004). Ninety-eight percent (54 of 55) of residents felt that it was ‘extremely’ or ‘somewhat’ important to receive education about pediatric pain management. Their preferred methods to learn children's pain management were through role modeling (61%) and lectures (57%). Top challenges to optimal pediatric pain management were non-verbal patients, patients with disabilities, and young infants. Pediatric pain management education is important to EM residents. Residents recall receiving sub-optimal training on this important topic. They are especially uneasy in the management of younger children and those with disabilities. This study's findings can be used to inform post-graduate curriculum planning, in order to optimize pediatric pain assessment and treatment education.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".