MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4232610133 · doi:10.21203/rs.2.10155/v1

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Cameroonian physicians with regards to pain management at the emergency department: a multicenter cross-sectional study

2019· preprint· en· W4232610133 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paul Owono Etoundi, Junette Arlette Metogo Mbengono, Ferdinand Ndom Ntock, Joël Noutakdie Tochie, Dominique Christelle Anaba Ndom, Francky Teddy Endomba Angong, Gérard Beyiha, Jacqueline Ze Minkandé

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmergency departmentComplaintFamily medicineCross-sectional studyQuarter (Canadian coin)Pain managementEmergency medicinePhysical therapyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Pain is the most frequent presenting complaint in patients consulting or admitted to the emergency department (ED). Thus, its acute management is often done by physicians working in the ED. These practitioners are often general practitioners and not emergency medicine physicians in resource-poor settings. Hence, a mastery of pain management by these physicians may be important in relieving acute pain. We aimed to assess the knowledge, to determine the attitudes and practices of physicians in the management of pain in EDs of Cameroon. Methods: We carried out a prospective analytic cross-sectional study over four months in the year 2018. We enrolled all consenting physicians who were neither emergency medicine doctors nor anesthesiologists working at the EDs of five tertiary hospitals of Cameroon. Using a 30-item structured questionnaire, data on the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of pain management at the ED by these clinicians were studied. We used an externally validated score to assess the knowledge as either poor, insufficient, moderate or good. Results: A total of 58 physicians were included; 18 interns and 39 general practitioners. Their mean age was 28.6 ± 3 years and their average number of years of practice was 2.9 years. The level of knowledge was rated “poor” in 77.6% of physicians. Being a general practitioner was significantly associated with a poor level of knowledge (p=0.02; OR=5.1). We found a negative and significant correlation between knowledge and years of practice (p=0.04; r2= 0.06). More than three-quarter (82.8%) of participants used a pain scale to evaluate the severity of pain. The most used scale being the Visual Analog scale (56.9%). The most frequently used analgesic was paracetamol (98.3%), although only 3.5% of physicians correctly knew its half-life, delay of onset of action and duration of action. Conclusion: These findings suggest that physicians in EDs of Cameroon have poor knowledge and suboptimal practices in pain management. General practice and a greater number of professional experience seemed to favour these attitudes. Overall, there is an urgent need for refresher courses in acute pain management for physicians working in these resource-limited EDs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.397 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicEmergency and Acute Care Studies→French-language works237,207→