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
. 2022 Mar 1;122(3):20-28.
doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000822656.14887.1f.

CE: Assessing Movement-Evoked Pain

Affiliations

CE: Assessing Movement-Evoked Pain

Staja Booker et al. Am J Nurs. .

Abstract

One of the most common and nuanced tasks that nurses perform is pain assessment, particularly in acute postoperative settings where frequent reassessments are needed. Most assessments are limited to obtaining a pain intensity score with little attention paid to the conditions necessitating the assessment or the factors contributing to the pain. Pain is frequently assessed during rest, but seldom during periods of movement or activity, which is a crucial omission given that acute postoperative movement-evoked pain (MEP) is intense and a common barrier to healing and restoration of function. In addition to physical limitations, MEP can impede cognitive, emotional, and social functioning in ways that can contribute to chronic pain, mood disorders, and disability. Professional and regulatory standards are moving away from a focus on pain intensity to an emphasis on its context, impact on function, and associated distress. Thus, there are many driving forces compelling nurses to integrate MEP assessments into practice to expedite the restoration of biopsychosocial functioning in postoperative patients. The authors discuss the clinical significance of a MEP assessment as well as protocols and tools for completing such assessments.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosures: The authors report no actual or perceived conflicts of interests.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
A depiction of a pain assessment continuum from use of pain recall questionnaires, which capture past pain at rest (and inadvertently some movement-related pain), to spontaneous pain assessment, which captures present pain but not pain related to physical activity. Standardized methods for assessing present movement-evoked pain are needed. Reprinted with permission from Corbett OB, et aL Movement-evoked pain: transforming the way we understand and measure pain. Pain 2019;! 60!4):757–61.

References

    1. Arnstein P, Gentile D, & Wilson M (2019). Validating the Functional Pain Scale for hospitalized adults. Pain Management Nursing, 20, 418–424. doi: 10.1016/j.pmn.2019.03.006. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Baker DW (2017). History of The Joint Commission’s pain standards: Lessons for today’s prescription opioid epidemic. JAMA, 317(11), 1117–1118. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.0935. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bischoff JM, Petersen M, Uçeyler N, Sommer C, Kehlet H, & Werner MU (2013). Lidocaine patch (5%) in treatment of persistent inguinal postherniorrhaphy pain: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial. Anesthesiology, 119(6), 1444–1452. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3182a2a243. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Boitor M, Fiola JL, & Gélinas C (2016). Validation of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool and vital signs in relation to the sensory and affective components of pain during mediastinal tube removal in postoperative cardiac surgery intensive care unit adults. Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 31(5), 425–432. doi: 10.1097/JCN.0000000000000250. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Booker SQ, Herr KA, & Horgas A (2021). A paradigm shift for movement-based pain assessment in older adults: Practice, policy and regulatory drivers. Pain Management Nursing, 22(1), 21–27. doi: 10.1016/j.pmn.2020.08.003 - DOI - PMC - PubMed