Colonoscopy is
often a painful procedure – the duration of the pain or the intensity of it
varies from patient to patient and for the same patient for procedure done at
different times. The pain also depends on operator experience. What goes on in
the patient’s life external to their physical/mental health also plays a part
in the patient’s behavioural interaction during endoscopy. Hence, there are
patient factors, endoscopist factors and environmental factors at play.
Assessing the pain during the procedure
is the responsibility of the endoscopists and the endoscopy nurses. Endoscopy
nurses are thought to be a ‘third party’ in terms of assessing patient comfort.
The patient comfort assessment takes the form of the Gloucester score.
The Gloucester Scale
takes into account the frequency and duration of discomfort and any distress it
might cause the patient; it is often reported as
Comfortable – talking /
comfortable throughout
Minimal – 1 or 2 episodes of
mild discomfort without distress
Mild – more than 2 episodes
of discomfort without distress
Moderate – significant
discomfort experienced several times with some distress
Severe – frequent discomfort with significant distress
Numerical
rating of 0 to 4 are assigned for the above.
The difficulty
for colonoscopists and endoscopy nurses is that the Gloucester scoring scale is subjective and
acts as a post-event record rather than an intra-procedure guide. In other
words how to decide on how to score and while the patient is having a
particular score during the procedure what to do about it? The scoring system, I feel, is
currently is static and slightly retrospective. A scoring system, in my view, should be current and a
guide to action.
At a human
emotional level the idea that a medical procedure could cause or causes
distress (defined as extreme anxiety, sorrow or pain) in a patient is something
that is very difficult to cope for most clinical practitioners in healthcare.
It would be better for any assessment or score of such distress to be defined
(parametered) and linked to action so as to help the practitioner. This is
probably the intention of the Gloucester
score anyway but it is not explicit from the scoring system chart or table.
As an
endoscopist I reflect on how and why I have been scoring patients the way I do
and this is what I find myself doing.
0 – No pain
Comfortable – no visible evidence, if conversational no change in tone or speed
of conversation
1 – Minimal
pain – facial changes such as crease lines, licking the lips, pursing the lips,
in white patient’s skin turning pink or red. If conversational, tone of voice
changes or conversation transiently stops. There may be changes in the
breathing but difficult to detect. Patient does not complain explicitly.
2 – Mild pain
– facial and audible changes (grimace, moan, groan, sigh) Conversation stops for a longer period.
Vocally mentions (not complains) about discomfort Slight holding of breath
Conversation restarts with reassurance
3 – Moderate
pain – Patient asks you to stop temporarily due to pain. Patient explicitly
states that they have pain. There is a needed top up of IV medication. If
Entonox is used, then having to wait for pain to pass and the patient to give
permission before continuing procedure again. Needing to change position to
resolve or reduce pain. Patient withdraws consent due to a combination of
predominantly anxiety and less predominantly pain (pre-existing anxiety must be
present preferably with evidence such as tachycardia on admission or
pre-procedure or patient explicitly expressed anxiety, or on regular medication
for anxiety).
4 – Severe
pain – Pain after iv top up medication, attempts to unloop, changes of patient
position or (especially if Entonox) several patient guided stop-starts. Patient withdraws consent due to pain and the
procedure is abandoned. Simple reason, if the patient is in severe pain we have
no business to continue.
In practice,
there is no difference between 0 and 1 i.e. no pain and minimal pain; once a
scope is inserted and insufflation begins there is some degree of discomfort
and pain is bound to happen and at the level of 0 or 1 it simply means that the
patient is not concerned about it. No reassurance is needed for the purpose of
pain.
In practice if
reassurance is needed, offered and sufficient to continue the procedure after a
patient mention or staff recognition of pain then it is mild pain.
If the patient
shows features of what is assessed as moderate pain then top up intravenous
medication is given or if Entonox wait till patient gives permission to
proceed. For the purpose of scoring if top up intravenous medication was given
or in the case of Entonox if there was a need to wait for the patient to permit
explicitly to proceed then it is scored as moderate pain. If the patient
withdraws consent due to mostly anxiety (on the assumption that however anxious
the patient having started the procedure pain would be a trigger to withdraw
consent and probably not just anxiety alone) then the scoring would still be
‘moderate’ pain.
If the patient
is in severe pain the procedure is abandoned (and for the purposes off scoring,
if procedure had to be stopped due to pain then it is severe pain)
This is the
way I use a broadly subjective retrospective pain score into a mostly objective
intra-procedure guide by a hopefully logical three way dynamic link of defined
parameters, action taken and score.
Score
|
Severity
|
Parameter (Observed)
|
Parameter (expressed)
|
Action
|
0
|
No pain
|
Complete procedure
|
||
1
|
Minimal
|
Facial creasing, pursing
lips, change in tone of voice, transient stop in conversation. No verbal
complaint.
|
Complete Procedure
|
|
2
|
Mild
|
Grimace, moan, groan,
sigh. Breath holding. Verbally mentions pain (but not as ‘complaint’)
|
Complete procedure with
reassurance
|
|
3
|
Moderate
|
All of the above and need
to change position
|
All of above and patient
explicitly complains of pain with a need to stop procedure temporarily.
|
Complete procedure with
additional medication
|
Moderate
|
Anxiety explicitly
stated on admission
Taking medication for
anxiety
Physical features of
anxiety eg. tachycardia
|
Patient withdraws
consent due to a predominance of anxiety made worse by pain
|
Abandon procedure (after
additional medication was tried)
|
|
4
|
Severe
|
Pain not relieved by
top-up iv medication
Pain not relieved by
change of positions and attempted unlooping. If Entonox, then Pain not
relieved by waiting for patient to guide us to proceed.
|
Patient withdraws
consent
|
Abandon procedure
|
By having a link between
observable defined parameters and scoring I feel I am reducing my potential
bias in the manner I might score. By linking score parameters to action I feel
I further reduce the bias, I also feel this is able to offer better decision
making for myself. A pre-defined parameter-outcome link makes operational sense
and ensures ease of process.
These are all based on
self-reflection and observation of my own practice, I did not set out to
practice this way, I observed that I am practicing in this manner.
Then there is an issue of
ensuring a better patient memory of the procedure irrespective of how
uncomfortable the procedure actually was. This is achieved by slow withdrawal,
in addition I have already written about the explicit use of humour if possible
and appropriate, this is important for all the scores. http://successinhealthcare.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/kahneman-colonoscopy-and-goole.html
Perhaps all endoscopists
are already doing this, may be not explicitly, in which case this was my excuse
to write a blog.
©M HEMADRI
Follow me on Twitter @HemadriTweets
No comments:
Post a Comment