The system will be unavailable for updates from 12:30 on Tuesday 23 May to prepare for the upgrade of the software platform.

Improving perioperative pain management: a preintervention and postintervention study in 7 developing countries

Zaslansky, Ruth ; Chapman, C. Richard ; Baumbach, Philipp ; Bytyqi, Adem ; Lopes, Jose M. Castro ; Chetty, Sean ; Kopf, Andreas ; Li, Li ; Ming, Lim Ern ; Olawoye, Olayinka ; Parico, Jane Rizza ; Soyannwo, Olaitan ; Stamenkovic, Dusica ; Wang, Hongwei ; Meissner, Winfried (2019-01-01)

CITATION: Zaslansky, R. et al. 2019. Improving perioperative pain management: a preintervention and postintervention study in 7 developing countries. PAIN Reports, 4(1). doi:10.1097/PR9.0000000000000705

The original publication is available at


Introduction: The burden of untreated postoperative pain is high. Objective: This study assessed feasibility of using quality improvement (QI) tools to improve management of perioperative pain in hospitals in multiple developing countries. Methods: The International Pain Registry and Developing Countries working groups, from the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP), sponsored the project and PAIN OUT, a QI and research network, coordinated it, and provided the research tools. The IASP published a call about the project on its website. Principal investigators (PIs) were responsible for implementing a preintervention and postintervention study in 1 to 2 surgical wards in their hospitals, and they were free to choose the QI intervention. Trained surveyors used standardized and validated web-based tools for collecting findings about perioperative pain management and patient reported outcomes (PROs). Four processes and PROs, independent of surgery type, assessed effectiveness of the interventions. Results: Forty-three providers responded to the call; 13 applications were selected; and PIs from 8 hospitals, in 14 wards, in 7 countries, completed the study. Interventions focused on teaching providers about pain management. Processes improved in 35% and PROs in 37.5% of wards. Conclusions: The project proved useful on multiple levels. It offered PIs a framework and tools to perform QI work and findings to present to colleagues and administration. Management practices and PROs improved on some wards. Interpretation of change proved complex, site-dependent, and related to multiple factors. PAIN OUT gained experience coordinating a multicentre, international QI project. The IASP promoted research, education, and QI work.

Please refer to this item in SUNScholar by using the following persistent URL:
This item appears in the following collections: