Disclosure: Michael A. Ashburn, MD, MPH COI Summary (5 years looking backward): Dr. Ashburn has been the principle investigator for grants awarded to the University of Pennsylvania sponsored by Pfizer (2009), Cephalon (2009), GW Pharma (2012), AstraZeneca (2010), Endo Pharmaceuticals (2009), and GalaxoSmithKline (2009). Dr. Ashburn has been a co-investigator on grants awarded to the University of Pennsylvania to conduct clinical research sponsored by Medtronic, Inc. (2012). Over the last 5 years, Dr. Ashburn has served as a consultant to Becton Dickinson (2011), Cephalon (2011 and 2012), Cubist (2011), Maruishi (2011 and 2012), and Vantia (2010). Dr. Ashburn was a co-founder and shareholder of ZARS Pharma, which was purchased in 2011 by Nuvo Research. No other authors have any conflicts of interest/disclosures to report.
Can Assessing Chronic Pain Outcomes Data Improve Outcomes?
Version of Record online: 9 APR 2013
Wiley Periodicals, Inc
Volume 14, Issue 6, pages 779–791, June 2013
How to Cite
Witkin, L. R., Farrar, J. T. and Ashburn, M. A. (2013), Can Assessing Chronic Pain Outcomes Data Improve Outcomes?. Pain Medicine, 14: 779–791. doi: 10.1111/pme.12075
- Chronic pain is common and exerts a substantial social and economic burden on both the affected individual and society.
- There are limited data to guide physician decision making. However, even when data exist, health care providers often do not provide care in accordance to best evidence. There is a high degree of variability in how health care is provided, and this variability contributes significantly to poor outcomes.
- Standardization of the process of patient care improves patient outcomes even when there are limited data to guide decision making.
- Integration of outcomes data collection into ongoing patient care is the cornerstone to efforts to improve patient outcomes.
- Outcome measures should be carefully selected. Outcome measures should be valid (i.e., actually measure what they are intended to measure), easily understood, and as often as possible be similar to those measures used elsewhere to allow for comparison of outcomes among providers or programs.
- Once outcome data collection is in place, programs can institute efforts to improve patient outcomes. These efforts can then be monitored via analysis of patient outcomes.
- Quality is not a static goal, and therefore, continuous quality improvement programs are necessary.
- Issue online: 20 JUN 2013
- Version of Record online: 9 APR 2013
- University of Pennsylvania
Options for accessing this content:
- If you are a society or association member and require assistance with obtaining online access instructions please contact our Journal Customer Services team.
- If your institution does not currently subscribe to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
- Login via other institutional login options http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/login-options.
Login via OpenAthens
Search for your institution's name below to login via Shibboleth.
Registered Users please login:
- Access your saved publications, articles and searches
- Manage your email alerts, orders and subscriptions
- Change your contact information, including your password
Please register to:
- Save publications, articles and searches
- Get email alerts
- Get all the benefits mentioned below!
Patients and/or caregivers may access this content for use in relation to their own personal healthcare or that of a family member only. Terms and conditions will apply.