4.4 Article

But I know what works - patients' experience of spinal cord injury neuropathic pain management

期刊

DISABILITY AND REHABILITATION
卷 34, 期 25, 页码 2139-2147

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2012.676146

关键词

Complementary treatment; non-pharmacological treatment; pain; patient expectation; spinal cord injury

资金

  1. Swedish Cancer & Traffic Injury Society Fund [CTRF]
  2. Swedish Association for Survivors of Accident and Injury [RTP]
  3. Norrbacka-Eugenia Foundation
  4. Karolinska Institutet Funds and Foundations

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To explore and obtain increased knowledge about (i) strategies and treatments used by individuals with neuropathic pain following spinal cord injury (SCI) for handling long-term pain, and (ii) their experience, needs and expectations of SCI neuropathic pain management. Methods: Qualitative methods with an emergent research design were used. Eighteen informants who suffered from long-term SCI neuropathic pain participated. Data were collected with diaries and thematized research interviews. Content analysis and constant comparison according to grounded theory were used for the analyses. Results: A model with four categories emerged: Pain is my main problem explained the impact of pain in the informants' everyday life; Drugs - the health care solution described the informants' experience of pain management; The gap in my meeting with health care described the discrepancy between what the informants wanted and what health care could offer. But. this works for me described treatments and strategies, which the informants found helpful for pain control and pain relief. Conclusion: Neuropathic pain, one of the major problems following SCI, is difficult to treat successfully. To improve treatment outcome, health care needs to listen to, respond to and respect the patient's knowledge, experience and wishes. Future research needs to address treatments that patients find effective.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据