Recall of pain and discomfort during oral procedures experienced by intubated critically ill patients in the intensive care unit: A qualitative elicitation study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Intubated and mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) may experience pain during routine oral procedures such as oral suctioning and tooth brushing. Despite the importance of pain prevention and management, little is known about patients’ experiences of procedural oral pain.Aims: The aim of this study was to explore patients’ recollections and recommendations for pain and discomfort during routine oral procedures.Methods: A qualitative descriptive design was used. Adult patients were recruited from a mixed medical–surgical–trauma ICU in an academic hospital in Toronto, Canada. Participants were interviewed using object elicitation methods within 7 days of discharge from the ICU. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis methods.Results: We recruited 33 participants who were primarily male (23, 70%), with an average age of 54 (SD = 18) years, admitted with a medical (13, 39%), trauma (11, 33%), or surgical (9, 27%) diagnosis and dentate (27, 82%). Most participants described oral procedures as painful, discomforting, and emotionally distressing. Identified sources of pain included dry, inflamed oral tissues and procedural technique. Procedural pain behaviors were perceived to be frequently misinterpreted by clinicians as agitation, with consequences including physical restraint and unrelieved suffering. Participants advocated for greater frequency of oral care to prevent oral health deterioration, anticipatory procedural guidance, and structured pain assessment to mitigate the dehumanizing experience of unmanaged pain.Conclusions: Patients described routine oral care procedures as painful and recalled suboptimal management of such pain. Procedural oral pain is an important target for practice improvement.
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.
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 | 0.113 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it