Thesis (doctoral)--Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, 1988. / Extra t.p. with thesis statement inserted. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (doctoral)--Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, 1990. / Extra t.p. with thesis statement inserted. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (doctoral)--Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, 1988. / Extra t.p. with thesis statement inserted. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (doctoral)--Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, 1990. / Extra t.p. with thesis statement inserted. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2005. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 139-164).

Thesis (MTech (Radiography))--Cape Peninsula University of Technology, 2010. / The focus of this study is the role of the Radiation Therapist (RTT) in the assessment of pain in cancer patients. The study was carried out at a Radiotherapy Department of a large Teaching Hospital in Ghana and addressed the following research questions; 1) What is the role of the RTT in the assessment of pain in cancer patients, 2) Why should the RTTs’ role be extended to include pain assessment, 3) What are the challenges for the RTT when taking on the role of pain assessment in radiation oncology and 4) How can pain assessment become a routine role for the RTT in a busy radiation oncology department? 5) How would this extended role of the RTT assist management of patient? This study was conducted because many cancer patients suffer pain and to many, it can be more debilitating than the primary disease itself. The RTTs who are involved in the daily management of cancer patients during their radiation treatment can find it stressful to witness their patients going through such pain particularly when they do not have a role in the management of pain. In Ghana, there are few radiation oncologists (ROs) and therefore an extended scope for RTTs, that includes pain assessment and a meaningful contribution to the management of their patients’ pain, would be advantageous to all. A mixed method research approach was adopted for gathering quantitative and qualitative data. This included data collection of; interview, observation and review of existing document. A pain questionnaire SF-MPQ-2 by Melzack (2009) was adapted as a tool for assessing pain in the study participants.

D.Cur. / Midwives are responsible to assess pain before treating it; then they should reassess the pain to evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions and plan future therapy. Accurate and objective measures of labour pain continue to be scarce and the discrepancy in labour pain perceptions between parturients and health-care providers remains challenging. Various pain measurement tools are currently in use measuring chronic and acute pain, but many problems were encountered applying these methods to the woman in labour. The charts were detailed and required too much time to complete. The aim of the study was to develop a multidimensional labour pain assessment instrument to assist clinicians and midwives with labour pain control. Objectives for developing a valid and reliable instrument to accurately measure labour pain included refinement of the labour pain assessment instrument developed from literature, testing of the refined instrument on patients during labour, compilation of a final instrument and development of guidelines on how to implement the labour pain assessment instrument in nursing practice. A descriptive and exploratory approach was used to describe, evaluate, observe, explore and assemble new knowledge on assessment and measurement of pain during the first stage of labour. Development of the instrument was addressed in the literature chapter. The research was conducted in three phases, combining qualitative and quantitative research.During phase one, the instrument was refined in two stages. Focus group interviews were conducted with members regarded as knowledgeable in the field of normal labour who evaluated the face and content validity of the instrument. The most senior people teaching Midwifery at all South African universities evaluated the face and content validity of the instrument with an open-ended questionnaire thereafter, using the Delphi technique. The analysis of the first Delphi round was compared to the focus group analysis. The instrument was altered and submitted to the Delphi experts in a second open-ended questionnaire to confirm the alterations.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Objectives: The purpose was to evaluate pain scores (SF-36 BPS) among pre-diabetic patients on metformin or placebo to determine if patients on metformin therapy report less pain (higher SF-36 BPS) than patients on placebo. Study design: A descriptive retrospective review of pain scores was conducted using secondary data analyses of the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) and Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study (DPPOS) conducted from 1996 to 2008. Patients were randomly assigned to placebo, low (850 mg/day) or high dose (1700 mg/day) metformin groups. Pain scores using the SF-36 BPS standard version were taken before randomization and annually (year one through four). Results: Out of 3,819 patients that participated in the original study, 1,056 patients met the current study criteria. The metformin group included 506 patients and the placebo group included 550 patients. With an alpha level of 0.05 for all analyses, baseline pain scores between the metformin group and placebo group showed no significant difference. Year two showed significance between placebo and metformin pain scores (75.2 vs 78.6). All other years were not significant. Comparing low and high dose metformin and placebo groups, years one, two and three displayed significant differences in pain scores. In years one and two, the high dose metformin group reported less pain than the placebo group (80.7 vs 77.7; 80.1 vs 75.2) and the low dose metformin group (80.7 vs 71.8; 80.1 vs 68.6). In year three, the high dose metformin group had less pain than the low dose metformin group (78.4 vs 70.5).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2004. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 66-77).

The aim of this study was to explore the process of an eight-week autogenic training (AT) programme for people experiencing chronic pain, as perceived by participants, and to hypothesise about mechanism of change, where reported. Eleven semi-structured interviews were conducted with women who had taken part in AT at the Royal London Hospital of Integrated Medicine (N=8) or with a private practitioner accredited by the British Autogenic Society (N=3). A grounded theory design was employed to build an inductive model ‘grounded’ in the qualitative data. Six main categories emerged: 1) ‘Nobody knows what’s wrong with me’: Trying to get help for the pain; 2) ‘A “mind-body” conversation’: The process of AT for chronic pain; 3) ‘Something my body wanted more of – like nectar’: The effects of AT; 4) ‘Bringing us back’: Practicing AT with other(s); 5) ‘Giving yourself permission to stop’: Practicing AT independently; and 6) ‘Not just free-falling’: Comparing AT with other therapies. A number of inter-related sub-categories and dimensions were also identified. The study suggests that AT is a useful therapeutic tool with benefits for both physical and psychological well-being for people experiencing chronic pain. It illuminates the inter-connected nature of these areas of health, which have historically been treated as distinct entities. Further research is needed to explore a potential role for AT in management of stress, pain and wellbeing.