↓ Skip to main content

Drug-based pain management for people with dementia after hip or pelvic fractures: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Drug-based pain management for people with dementia after hip or pelvic fractures: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12877-017-0446-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kai Moschinski, Silke Kuske, Silke Andrich, Astrid Stephan, Irmela Gnass, Erika Sirsch, Andrea Icks

Abstract

Studies indicate that people with dementia do not receive the same amount of analgesia after a hip or pelvic fracture compared to those without cognitive impairment. However, there is no systematic review that shows to what extent drug-based pain management is performed for people with dementia following a hip or pelvic fracture. The aim of this systematic review was to identify and analyse studies that investigate drug-based pain management for people with dementia with a hip or pelvic fracture in all settings. Treatment could be surgical or conservative. We also analysed study designs, methods and variables, as well as which assessments were applied to measure pain management and mental status. The development of this systematic review protocol was guided by the PRISMA-P requirements, which were taken into consideration during the review procedures. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Knowledge and ScienceDirect were searched. Studies published up to January 2016 were included. The data extraction, content and quantitative descriptive analysis were carried out systematically, followed by a critical appraisal. Eight of the 13 included studies focusing on patient data showed that people with dementia received less drug-based pain management than people without cognitive impairment. Four studies based on surveys of healthcare professionals stated that cognitive impairment is a major barrier for effective pain management. There was heterogeneity regarding the assessment of the mental status and the pain assessment of the patients. The assessment of the drugs administered in all of the studies working with patient data was achieved through chart reviews. People with dementia do not seem to receive the same amount of opioid analgesics after hip fracture as people without cognitive impairment. There is need to enhance pain assessment and management for these patients. Future research should pay more attention to the use of the appropriate items for assessing cognitive impairment and pain in people with dementia. This systematic review was registered at Prospero ( CRD42016037309 ); on 11 April 2016, and the systematic review protocol was published (Syst Rev. 5(1):1, 2016).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 101 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 20%
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Other 8 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 4%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 34 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 20%
Psychology 6 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 37 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 June 2017.
All research outputs
#6,204,204
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#1,540
of 3,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,555
of 430,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#37
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,312 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 430,074 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.