Cited by 35Pain Management and Opioid UseAnesthesia and Pain ManagementPediatric Pain Management Techniques

The Barriers to High-Quality Inpatient Pain Management: A Qualitative Study

Open access
Lin, Richard J., Reid, M. Carrington, Liu, Lydia L., Chused, Amy E., Evans, Arthur T.·2015·American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®

Abstract

The current literature suggests deficiencies in the quality of acute pain management among general medical inpatients. The aim of this qualitative study is to identify potential barriers to high-quality acute pain management among general medical inpatients at an urban academic medical center during a 2-year period. Data are collected using retrospective chart reviews, survey questionnaires, and semistructured, open-ended interviews of 40 general medical inpatients who have experienced pain during their hospitalization. Our results confirm high prevalence and disabling impacts of pain and significant patient- and provider-related barriers to high-quality acute pain management. We also identify unique system-related barriers such as time delay and pain management culture. Efforts to improve the pain management experience of general medical inpatients will need to address all these barriers.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1049909114530491

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 28 · Cited by 35

Authors
Lin, R. J., Reid, M. C., Liu, L. L., Chused, A. E., & Evans, A. T.
Affiliations
Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Lin, Richard J.
Venue
American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®
Published
2014-04-11
Volume
32
Issue
6
Pages
594-599
ISSN
  • 1049-9091 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-2715
OpenAlex
W2011683435
Cited by
35
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
2.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine® (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000457)
  • Weill Cornell Medical College
  • National Institute on Aging (P30AG022845)
  • National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR024996)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Anesthesia and Pain Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
Keywords
acute pain management, general medical inpatients, pain prevalence, academic medical centers
MeSH terms
Academic Medical Centers, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Humans, Inpatients, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Urban Population, Young Adult, Pain Management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review