Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2006 Jun;21(6):607-12.
doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00415.x.

Measuring pain as the 5th vital sign does not improve quality of pain management

Richard A Mularski  1 , Foy White-Chu, Devorah Overbay, Lois Miller, Steven M Asch, Linda Ganzini
Affiliations

Measuring pain as the 5th vital sign does not improve quality of pain management

Richard A Mularski et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2006 Jun.

Abstract

Background: To improve pain management, the Veterans Health Administration launched the "Pain as the 5th Vital Sign" initiative in 1999, requiring a pain intensity rating (0 to 10) at all clinical encounters.

Objective: To measure the initiative's impact on the quality of pain management.

Design: We retrospectively reviewed medical records at a single medical center to compare providers' pain management before and after implementing the initiative and performed a subgroup analysis of patients reporting substantial pain (> or =4) during a postimplementation visit.

Participants: Unique patient visits selected from all 15 primary care providers of a general medicine outpatient clinic.

Measurements: We used 7 process indicators of quality pain management, based on appropriately evaluating and treating pain, to assess 300 randomly selected visits before and 300 visits after implementing the pain initiative.

Results: The quality of pain care was unchanged between visits before and after the pain initiative (P>.05 for all comparisons): subjective provider assessment (49.3% before, 48.7% after), pain exam (26.3%, 26.0%), orders to assess pain (11.7%, 8.3%), new analgesic (8.7%, 11.0%), change in existing analgesics (6.7%, 4.3%), other pain treatment (11.7%, 13.7%), or follow-up plans (10.0%, 8.7%). Patients (n=79) who reported substantial pain often did not receive recommended care: 22% had no attention to pain documented in the medical record, 27% had no further assessment documented, and 52% received no new therapy for pain at that visit.

Conclusions: Routinely measuring pain by the 5th vital sign did not increase the quality of pain management. Patients with substantial pain documented by the 5th vital sign often had inadequate pain management.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Kirsch B, Berdine H, Zablotsky D, et al. Management strategy: identifying pain as the fifth vital sign. VHSJ. 2000:49–59.
    1. Health Care Advisory Board. Pain Management in the VA and the Private Sector. Washington, DC: The Advisory Board Company; 1998.
    1. Jacox A, Carr DB, Payne R, et al. 1994 Management of Cancer Pain. Clinical Practice Guideline No.9. AHCPR Publication No. 94-0592. Rockville, MD. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, March 1994.
    1. American Pain Society Quality of Care Committee. Quality improvement guidelines for the treatment of acute pain and cancer pain. JAMA. 1995;274:1874–80. - PubMed
    1. American Pain Society. Principles of Analgesic Use in the Treatment of Acute Pain and Cancer Pain. 4. Glenview, IL: American Pain Society; 1999.

Publication types