|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Re: ACOG Antepartum Record - Pain Scale?From: ainsron (ainsron@sbcglobal.net)Wed Nov 21 09:33:33 2007
It also reflects the recommendation/requirement of the nursing and medical boards of California that pain be assessed on any patient whose vital signs are recorded: "It is now required that all health care staff record pain assessment each time that vital signs are recorded for each patient. If the institution is using the zero to ten pain assessment scale, a recording of pain 2/10, fulfills the requirements of this law. The Board reminds RNs that pain assessment is based on patient self-report and that patient's can be asleep and still experience significant pain; appropriate charting would be to write "asleep" for the pain rating. Registered nurses will continue to be required to monitor all five vital signs and take appropriate action based on deviations from normal. In other words, a competent registered nurse intervenes when the patient's pain is not being managed according to the agreed upon comfort level." Ronald E. Ainsworth, MD, FACOG -----Original Message----- From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of ainsron Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 8:26 AM To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L Subject: Re: ACOG Antepartum Record - Pain Scale? It probably reflects JCAHO's position that pain is the "fifth vital sign." Ronald E. Ainsworth, MD, FACOG -----Original Message----- From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of Don Miller Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 6:31 AM To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L Subject: ACOG Antepartum Record - Pain Scale? Just took a look at the latest ACOG Antepartum record and noticed that they slipped in a new column in the obstetric flowsheet for "Pain Scale". Considering that things that ACOG publishes tend to be held up as a standards of care (especially by lawyers), I'm wondering where this item came from. Where is the overwhelming evidence of benefit to the patient or a multitude of references to elevate such an item to suggest routine documentation at every prenatal visit? I've done a cursory look through PubMed and the ACOG website and haven't found anything. If there is such data, could someone please illuminate me as to the value of this new column and the proper response to patients who repeatedly say they have pain? What are the next diagnostic steps to defend oneself when a patient reports and you document continual pain? OR, is this designed to be defensive legal strategy to counteract patients with bad outcomes who said they were always in pain and there was no documentation of such (or the absence of pain)? My worst fear is that this was a pet project or self-serving agenda lobbied by someone on the committee that creates the form and is not evidence-based and adds one more task, one more question.. This is in the face of real evidence that suggests that urine dipstick testing for sugar and protein provides no benefit and probably should be dropped from routine prenatal care and from all prenatal forms. So, what's the story?
-- Donald W. Miller, Jr., MD, FACOG eNATAL, LLC http://www.eNATAL.com
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Tue Dec 2 04:54:53 2008 |
The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.