Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorD. Mahar, Patricken_US
dc.contributor.authorWasiak, Jasonen_US
dc.contributor.authorJ. O⿿Loughlin, Christopheren_US
dc.contributor.authorChristelis, Nicholasen_US
dc.contributor.authorA. Arnold, Carolynen_US
dc.contributor.authorSpinks, Annelieseen_US
dc.contributor.authorDanilla, Stefanen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-03T15:16:18Z
dc.date.available2017-05-03T15:16:18Z
dc.date.issued2012en_US
dc.date.modified2014-10-09T03:40:47Z
dc.identifier.issn03054179en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.burns.2011.09.015en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/47675
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Pain continues to be an ongoing issue of concern in adult burn patients. Inadequate pain assessment hinders meaningful research, and prevents the optimal management of burn pain. The objective of this study was to examine the content of existing research in burn pain with the frequency and context of pain assessment tool use in randomized clinical trials in order to further inform their use for future researchers and clinicians. Methods: Electronic searches of MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library databases from 1966 onwards were used to identify English articles related to clinical trials utilising pain assessment in adult burns patients. Results: The systematic literature search identified 25 randomized clinical trials utilising pain assessment tools. Unidimensional pain assessment tools were most frequently used pain assessment tools, with multidimensional tools used less often, despite the multifaceted and complex nature of burn pain. Conclusion: The review highlights the lack of consistency of pain assessment tool use in randomized clinical trials with respect to managing burn pain. We recommend a broader but consistent use of multidimensional pain assessment tools for researchers undertaking clinical trials in this field. The review supports the need for an international expert consensus to identify the necessary critical outcomes and domains for clinicians and researchers undertaking further research into burn pain.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_US
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_US
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationNen_US
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom147en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto154en_US
dc.relation.ispartofissue2en_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalBurnsen_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume38en_US
dc.rights.retentionYen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchClinical Sciences not elsewhere classifieden_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode110399en_US
dc.titleFrequency and use of pain assessment tools implemented in randomized controlled trials in the adult burns population: A systematic reviewen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Peer Reviewed (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articlesen_US
gro.date.issued2012
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record