Skip to content

A Novel Electronic Method of Collecting Pain Scores in the Emergency Department

Patient Input Monitoring of Pain in the Emergency Room: Novel Electronic Log (PIMPERNEL). A Randomised Controlled Trial of an Electronic Pain Score Display in Adults in the Emergency Department

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03881982
Acronym
PIMPERNEL
Enrollment
105
Registered
2019-03-20
Start date
2017-08-03
Completion date
2019-07-31
Last updated
2020-01-30

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Pain, Acute

Brief summary

Can a novel electronic display of pain be successfully used in the emergency department and does it (1) change analgesic prescription and (2) change amount of pain experienced? Pain is a common symptom in emergency care. As patients are seldom reassessed, staff may not be aware of pain. Currently, members of nursing or medical staff need to ask patients about their pain and record it manually using a visual analogue scale from 0-10. The new electronic display uses buttons to represent a pain scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain). Patients will select the number that best corresponds to their pain every 15 minutes. In the experimental group, the score will be displayed on a screen. In the control group, the score will not be displayed. The investigators will compare the overall amount of pain in both groups, and will look at their pain management (painkillers prescribed). The investigators will also ask patients and staff for their opinions on the display. The study will include adult patients in the emergency department at Leicester Royal Infirmary with an initial pain score of 5 or more who are able to make a decision about whether to participate. Participants will also need to be likely to stay in the hospital for more than 2 hours to allow the investigators to gather enough useful data. The study will recruit 200 participants. If the study can demonstrate that the monitor is acceptable to patients and staff and results in improved pain management, it is a low cost intervention which could be widely implemented within the NHS. It also has the potential for being used in other areas such as surgical wards. The investigators have previously found that 300-400 patients per week in the department have moderate to severe pain and might therefore benefit from this monitor.

Interventions

OTHERPIMPERNEL Novel Electronic Log: Pain display can be seen

Pain scores are displayed on the screen when the participant presses the corresponding button

OTHERPIMPERNEL Novel Electronic Log: Pain display is hidden

Participants press the buttons to record their pain score but the score is not on display (the screen is turned backwards).

Sponsors

University of Leicester
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* adult (18 years and over) * underlying condition giving rise to significant pain (initial VAS pain score of 5 or more) * likely to be staying in the hospital for at least 2 hours * willing and able to give informed consent * able to understand and speak a good level of English

Exclusion criteria

* children (under 18 years) * patients not willing to undergo routine care (analgesic treatment) * patients who do not have capacity to consent * patients who are unwilling or unable to give informed consent * prisoners * patients who cannot understand the study information in English * currently participating in another clinical trial as far as can be determined from information available at the time of assessment * patients who have a physical or visual disability which will prevent them from holding or using the pain display

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pain reported by the patient:11 point numerical pain scaleUp to 6 hoursData collected from the display using the 11 point numerical pain scale. The area under the curve will be compared between the intervention and control groups. The Numerical Rating Scale is a scale from 0-10 (whole numbers only, where 0 represents 'no pain' and 10 represents 'worst pain ever').

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Comparison of pain recorded on the display (closest minute) with verbal pain assessment at 2 and 4 hoursUp to 6 hoursThe scores recorded by the participants at 2 and 4 hours into their hospital stay will be compared with the scores recorded by nursing staff in the electronic record. The 11 point numerical rating scale is used for both measurements. The Numerical Rating Scale is a scale from 0-10 (whole numbers only, where 0 represents 'no pain' and 10 represents 'worst pain ever').
Understanding the pattern of pain (shape of the curve of pain scores) over the time of the ED stayUp to 6 hours
Recording time to second dose of analgesia and whether there is a pattern to thisUp to 6 hours
Proportion of possible scores recorded by patientsUp to 6 hours
Opinion of patientsUp to 6 hoursUses a short (4 question) questionnaire designed for this study. Questions on ease of use, whether the monitor is a good idea, whether participants would use it again in the future and whether it improved their experience as a patient, plus a comments box. Questions: 1) How easy was it to use the pain monitor? (very easy, easy, no opinion, difficult, very difficult) 2) I think that the pain monitor is a good idea (strongly agree, agree, no opinion, disagree, strongly disagree) 3) I would use the monitor again in the future (strongly agree, agree, no opinion, disagree, strongly disagree) 4) The pain monitor improved my experience as a patient (strongly agree, agree, no opinion, disagree, strongly disagree)
Opinion of staff (including their opinion of whether patients press the button for reasons other than pain)Up to 6 hoursShort (4 question) questionnaire designed for the study. Questions on whether the display is practical to use in the Emergency Department, whether they think it is a good idea, whether it is likely to improve the patient experience and whether a patient used the display to get their attention for a reason other than pain. Also has a comments box. Questions: 1) The pain display is practical to use in the Emergency Department (strongly agree, agree, no opinion, disagree, strongly disagree) 2) I think that the pain display is a good idea (strongly agree, agree, no opinion, disagree, strongly disagree) 3) The pain display is likely to improve the patient experience (strongly agree, agree, no opinion, disagree, strongly disagree) 4) A patient used the pain display to get my attention for a reason other than pain (yes, not sure, no)
Opinion of researchers regarding any likely stratification needsUp to 6 hoursSubjective opinion of researchers having completed the study on whether stratification would be required in future studies. No specific measurement used.
Use of analgesia in intervention and control groups (dose, time prescribed, time administered and name)Up to 6 hoursThe dose, time prescribed, time administered and name of analgesia given pre-hospital and whilst in hospital will be recorded and a comparison made between the groups. This is a feasibility study only so exact outcome depends upon what data can be collected.

Countries

United Kingdom

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026