PAIN EXPERIENCES IN OLDER ADULTS WITH HEART FAILURE IN THE HOME HEALTHCARE SETTING AFTER HOSPITAL DISCHARGE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Pain symptoms are underreported in older adults (i.e., those ages ≥65), because many consider it a part of aging. Pain is highly prevalent in patients with heart failure (HF). HF is increasing in incidence with the aging population. Pain is also an important risk factor for rehospitalization among home healthcare patients with HF. However, little is known about the pain experiences of older adults with HF after hospital discharge. Accordingly, this study sought to describe pain and other symptoms among older adults with HF in the home healthcare setting using a mixed-methods approach. We conducted semi-structured interviews. We used the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale and Brief Pain Instrument on older adults (N=17) with HF in the home healthcare setting within 10 days of hospital discharge. The mean age was 76±9.25 years, nearly 50% were female, and most (90%) were White. The majority of participants managed pain with medications. Loss of appetite had the highest mean severity score (3.88±2.50) of symptoms measured. The mean score for pain at its worst was 4.94±3.07. Pain interfering with sleep had the highest mean score (4.24±3.36). Using content analysis we identified 4 distinct themes regarding the pain experience: (1) differences in the pain experiences before and after being diagnosed of HF, (2) symptoms accompanied with pain, (3) health care providers’ pain assessment, and (4) knowledge about pain management. These findings will contribute to the development and evaluation of a pain assessment and management protocol targeting older adults with HF in the home healthcare setting.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".