Document
Keep your attention on the care encounter.
Record the conversation and clearly state your own findings and agreed actions.
Hysio Pain Medicine
After a pain consultation or intervention, you say what the client told you about pain and functioning. Hysio keeps scores, medication and the effect of the treatment separate.
A structured report in your professional terminology
From care encounter to report
Hysio turns spoken information into a report. Choose the report format for the conversation you are documenting.
Document
Record the conversation and clearly state your own findings and agreed actions.
AI assistants
You stay in control of what gets saved.
In your workday
More attention for the conversation, less typing afterwards.
State relevant information, your own findings and agreed actions aloud so you can find them in your report.
The information appears under the headings of your chosen report format, so you can review each section.
Check names, facts and agreed actions. Edit the text where needed before using the report in your records.
Try it yourself
Try Hysio free for 14 days or schedule a personal demo.
For your team
Quick answer
For acute and chronic pain, with a dedicated place for pain scores, functioning, medication and the effect of interventions.
A pain consultation, intake or evaluation after an intervention: read here how Hysio fits in. Each answer follows the documentation formats and the sources of pain medicine.
For a pain score while exploring the reason for seeking care, the Pain Medicine Intake or the Pain Medicine Consultation usually fits: both organise the reason for seeking care, pain history and the reported pain score under recognisable headings. Hysio records the score as it was stated or supplied, with the source alongside it. If a procedure follows later, the Intervention Evaluation fits the follow-up encounter better. You choose which format belongs to this specific encounter; Hysio itself does not determine an indication and does not weigh the pain score. [2] [3] [4] [5] [1] [11]
The intervention report and pain history each have their own fixed headings in Hysio: the Intervention Evaluation keeps reason, procedure, findings and follow-up separate, while the Intake places pain history under History. This keeps it visible in the record which encounter each part comes from, with the source noted alongside it. As a result, you find information more quickly at a next encounter or a handover, without encounters getting mixed up. [2] [1] [10]
You place functioning under Findings along your record route, with its origin noted: the patient's own report, a questionnaire or your observation. Hysio puts that information in its fixed place within the chosen documentation format, but does not attach a conclusion or severity score to it. This keeps it clear for anyone who reads the record later whether functioning was reported by the patient or established by you, and what weight it carries in the assessment. [10] [1] [2]
Pain history counts as medical personal data and is processed with particular care: data is hosted in the EU and is only accessible to you and to those you deliberately give access. Hysio does not share anything automatically with third parties. The privacy policy describes how long data is kept and which rights a patient has. In daily practice, consent and a careful handover remain your responsibility, not Hysio's. [8] [15] [1]
The price of Hysio does not depend on a separate element such as the medication overview, but on the plan you choose: the current amounts and the fourteen-day free trial are on the pricing page. Changes to the rates are updated there; this page therefore does not state a separate amount. [6] [7]
Your own route alongside Hysio fits when a pain score belongs in a local format that the four documentation formats do not cover, for example a centre-specific measurement protocol with its own fields. In that case, compare what the source actually supplies with what your own template asks for, and use Hysio for the source-bound part that does fit. For the vast majority of a pain consultation, intake or evaluation, the documentation formats are intended to cover the pain score and the surrounding findings. [1] [10] [11]
During the source check, you read the generated intervention report back alongside the dictation or the notes from the encounter: is the order of reason, procedure and findings correct, and does it contain nothing that was not said? A fixed layout does not automatically make the text correct. Only after that comparison do you take the report into the record. If you are unsure about a passage, you rewrite it yourself before saving. [1] [11] [9]
During pain care, you keep your attention on the patient when discussing functioning by recording who provided the information, when functioning was discussed and which source belongs to it. The pain specialist assesses the meaning of the complaint and the follow-up. Hysio does not add a pain score or treatment choice. [1] [2] [10]
For pain history, Hysio organises what was said or supplied under the sections of the chosen report. Hysio does not add its own interpretation, diagnosis or severity estimate. You assess the pain history and decide which information goes into the final record. [1] [2] [10]
Start with the medication overview for one clearly defined type of encounter, for example a single intake, so that during the fourteen-day free trial you can see whether the layout fits the way you work. Note for each encounter which corrections you still make by hand. If that works well, expand to consultations and follow-up encounters. For the input step, use only what was actually said or supplied during the encounter. [7] [8] [1]
The Pain Medicine Consultation fits a regular care encounter around the pain mechanism, in which you organise the reason for the visit, history, examination and the follow-up discussed under Summary, Source information, Findings and Follow-up. The format is intended for both a first and a returning consultation, as long as the encounter does not call for a specific intake or intervention structure. With voice-driven reporting, you assess the content and decide whether the report can go into the record as it is. [2] [1] [11]
The Pain Medicine Intake fits the first encounter: the format organises the request for help, medical history, examination and the follow-up discussed under their own headings, so that pain history and context are recorded recognisably from the start. That makes the intake suitable as the starting point of a pain consultation, intake or evaluation, before a follow-up encounter or intervention takes place. In later encounters, voice-driven admin builds on this basis with a different documentation format. [3] [1] [11]
The Intervention Evaluation fits an encounter after an intervention has been carried out: the format organises the reason, procedure, findings and aftercare, so that the effect of the procedure sits recognisably alongside the earlier pain history. This format is intended for the follow-up encounter in which you discuss and evaluate a treatment, and not for a first introductory encounter. The assessment of the result stays with you as the pain specialist. [4] [1] [11]
The Pain Medicine SOAP Note fits an encounter in which you want to keep Subjective, Objective, Assessment and Plan as a fixed structure, for example a short follow-up consultation. The pain score and functioning then go under Subjective and Objective, while Assessment and Plan contain the professional assessment and the follow-up discussed. For an extensive first intake, a different format is usually more suitable than this compact structure. [5] [1] [11]
Which format fits pain history depends on the point in the care pathway: for a first encounter the Intake is the obvious choice, for a regular conversation the Consultation, and after a procedure the Intervention Evaluation. If the encounter calls for a compact SOAP structure, the SOAP Note may fit better. Always look at what the encounter actually was, not at which format you are used to using. [1] [2] [11]
The Intake is intended for the moment when the medication overview is being mapped for the first time, for example for a new patient or a new referral. If the medication overview has already been recorded and it concerns an adjustment after an interim encounter, a follow-up format such as the Consultation or the Intervention Evaluation fits better, because it sets the change alongside the earlier situation. This way, the build-up of the medication overview in the record stays easy to follow. [1] [2] [11]
After a follow-up encounter, what belongs with the pain score is mainly what was discussed in that specific conversation: the current score, what has changed and which follow-up was agreed. Earlier values are already in the record and do not need to be repeated. You only include the intervention report and medication overview if they actually came up during this encounter, not as general background information. [1] [2] [11]
A handover about the intervention report should contain the core of what was carried out, when that happened and which findings followed from it, with the source of that information alongside. Add who the recipient is and for what purpose you are sharing. Leave out details that are not intended for the handover. Check beforehand whether there is consent to share this information about the pain mechanism with the recipient. [1] [2] [11]
To separate functioning from other sources, you keep what the patient tells you, what you observe and what a questionnaire produces apart in the report. Hysio places each piece of data under the heading of the part of the encounter in which it was mentioned, with the source role alongside it. That way, when you read it back, you see immediately whether a statement about functioning comes from the patient or from your own assessment. [1] [2] [11]
Compare pain history between encounters by always looking at the same sections: the reason for seeking care, the course and the context recorded earlier. Hysio does not automatically repeat the previous text at a new encounter, so you set out side by side yourself what has changed. Only name a change if the source of this encounter genuinely supports it, and keep assumptions about earlier pain history out of the new report. [1] [2] [11]
In the history section, you describe pain history in the wording of the encounter: the reason for seeking care, the course, previous treatments and what the patient says. Hysio organises this under the heading History or Source information, depending on the chosen documentation format, and does not add its own interpretation. If a section does not come up during the encounter, it stays empty instead of being filled in with an assumption. [1] [11]
For the medication overview, you note who supplied the information: the patient, a relative, the pharmacy or the referring doctor. Hysio places that source role next to the data itself, so that you can see later whether a medication was mentioned by the patient or taken from a supplied overview. That distinction is needed because the reliability of the two sources can differ and you must be able to weigh that difference. [1] [15] [11]
For a pain score, record the instrument used, the scale and the time of measurement, for example a score at the start and end of the encounter. Hysio records these details as they were stated, including unit and time, but does not interpret the outcome. You decide whether a difference between two measurements is clinically relevant and what it means for the rest of the treatment. [1] [11]
Link the intervention report to the result by stating with the result which examination or procedure it comes from, including date and source. Hysio places the result under Findings, next to the intervention report it relates to, without merging the two into a single conclusion. You add your own assessment of what the result means for the pain mechanism and follow-up separately. [1] [11] [15]
No, Hysio does not assess imaging itself: if a radiology report or another result about functioning has been supplied, Hysio copies its text as it was written, with source and date. No image is opened or interpreted. The medical assessment of what a scan or image means for functioning and the pain mechanism stays entirely with you as the pain specialist. [10] [9] [11]
For pain history, Hysio uses the professional terms and abbreviations that were actually used during the encounter, instead of imposing its own standard vocabulary. If your team prefers to speak of the reason for seeking care rather than the complaint, that is how it appears in the report. Do check whether abbreviations are still clear to colleagues outside your own team, especially in a handover to another centre. [1] [11]
If the medication overview comes from a relative rather than the patient, you record that explicitly as the source: name or relationship, and what that person reported. Hysio keeps that origin separate from the patient's own report. Also record whether there is consent to share this information with others, because that consent is separate from recording the source itself. [1] [15] [11]
What the team mainly needs to know about a pain score is who took the measurement, when that happened and which follow-up was agreed. In the report, Hysio makes visible which encounter and which discipline a pain score comes from, so that a colleague at a multidisciplinary meeting does not have to search for its origin. Keep the explanation of the pain score short and factual, so that other disciplines can read it quickly. [1] [2] [15]
A good example case for an intervention report shows a concrete encounter: the reason for the procedure, what was carried out, the findings immediately afterwards and the aftercare agreed. For an example, always use an anonymised or fictional situation, never traceable patient data, and do not add a diagnosis that does not follow from the case itself. This way you show how the structure works without burdening a real patient. [1] [11] [2]
Limit a handover about functioning to what the recipient needs: the core of what the patient says they are and are not able to do, with the source and date of that information. Leave out background information that does not belong to the purpose of the handover. Hysio helps by placing functioning under a fixed heading, but the choice of what you hand over and to whom stays with you. [10] [8] [15] [11]
No, Hysio does not make a diagnosis about functioning or any other part of the report. The platform organises what was said or supplied about functioning. As the pain specialist, you assess the meaning for diagnosis and management based on your expertise and the information from the encounter. [9] [1] [11]
You check pain history before it is saved: Hysio provides a report based on the encounter, but the final text in the record is only valid after your assessment. This means you verify whether the account of pain history matches what was said and whether nothing is missing or has been added. That final review and the responsibility for the record stay with you, not with Hysio. [1] [9] [15]
If the medication overview is missing from the encounter, you mark it as not discussed instead of inventing a value or date. Hysio does not automatically fill in an empty section; it stays empty until the information is available. At a next encounter, you can still ask about the medication overview and add it. This keeps it clear what has actually been established and what is still open. [1] [9] [11]
No. Hysio does not assess an acute pain score and does not carry out triage. You carry out the acute assessment yourself. Afterwards, you can record what was discussed and carried out, including the pain score, medication and interventions mentioned. Hysio supports the documentation after the acute care. [9] [8] [11]
Information about the intervention report may only go to someone who is authorised to receive it, usually the patient or, with their consent, a referrer or treating colleague. Before sharing, always check the purpose, the consent and exactly who the recipient is. Hysio itself does not share anything automatically; it only makes visible which information there is, so that you consciously choose what you hand over and to whom. [8] [15] [1]
No, Hysio does not make a treatment plan around functioning. The platform puts the limitations and findings mentioned into the report, but does not choose a treatment, intervention or follow-up pathway. That choice stays with you as the pain specialist and, where needed, with your team. Hysio records the plan discussed. [9] [10] [11]
If uncertainty about pain history remains, keep it visible: write that something is unclear or still needs to be checked, instead of turning it into a firm statement. Hysio does not make a supplied wording more definite than the source allows. This keeps it visible in the record which parts of pain history are still open and which follow-up questions are needed at a next encounter. [1] [11] [9]
If sources contradict each other about the medication overview, you keep both versions separately with their origin, for example what the patient says next to what the pharmacy supplies. Hysio does not automatically choose which source is correct. Decide for yourself which version you take into the final record, and keep the other version traceable so that a colleague can later see why there was a difference. [1] [15] [11]
Record medication and the pain score as they were stated, including dosage, unit and time of measurement. Hysio does not add a calculation or its own interpretation. As the pain specialist, you assess whether a dosage or score is a reason to adjust the management plan. [1] [11] [9]
Before saving, you read the intervention report back alongside your own notes or the dictation: are the source, the date and the order of reason, procedure and findings correct? If anything about pain history that was discussed is missing, add it before you finalise the report. Only after this check is the report ready to be saved in the record. [1] [8] [9] [15]
Prepare a team handover about the intervention report by agreeing in advance who reviews the report and which parts of the pain history the recipient really needs. Limit the handover to that core instead of sharing the entire record. Record which follow-up was agreed, so that the receiving colleague knows what has already been discussed and what is still open after this encounter. [10] [8] [15] [2]
For team use, you agree which headings and terms you use for functioning and the medication overview, so that reports from different colleagues resemble each other. Also decide who approves a report after it has been written, before it goes into the record as final. Without such an agreement, individual styles diverge and it becomes harder to compare functioning between encounters and colleagues. [1] [2] [10]
The trial period lasts fourteen days. Assessment of the report structure centres on pain history in one clearly defined encounter type, for example only for new intakes. During that assessment, collect the corrections you keep making by hand and see whether there is a pattern in them. Assessment of consultations and follow-up encounters requires the pain history layout to work well. That way you get to know voice-driven reporting without overhauling your entire practice straight away. [7] [8] [1]
Adapt a report about the medication overview to local agreements by comparing the standard headings with what your centre uses and, where needed, having an authorised colleague review it with you. Hysio provides the basic structure; you may adapt the final text to your team's conventions, as long as the source data about the medication overview is correct. Record this local agreement once, so that everyone uses the same headings. [10] [1] [11]
State the score together with the instrument, for example the NRS at rest and on movement. Hysio records the numbers as you say them and puts them with the pain history. A score you did not ask about stays empty. After an intervention, you compare with the baseline yourself. [1] [11] [2]
Do not measure time savings around the intervention report with a generally promised percentage, but by keeping track within your own team of how many corrections a report still needs and how long checking it takes. Compare that with your old way of working after a few weeks. More important than the time savings themselves is that the intervention report is correct in content; only start using it more widely once that check consistently turns out well. [1] [10] [7]
The same free trial applies to functioning and the other sections as to the rest of Hysio: fourteen days, without needing a credit card. Use that period to assess whether the layout of functioning fits your encounters and whether the corrections you still need to make are manageable. The current terms are on the pricing page. [7] [6] [8]
Under Pricing you will find Hysio's current plans and the free trial. Under Legal you will find the agreements on data use, privacy and responsibility. There is no separate subscription price for pain history or a medication overview. The platform terms concern the use of Hysio; your report continues to be about the encounter discussed, the origin of information and the follow-up you have determined. [6] [8] [9]
Record your own terminology around the medication overview by agreeing within your team which words and abbreviations you use, and share that agreement once with everyone who writes or reads reports. Hysio adopts the terminology as it is used during the encounter, but does not help with making that team agreement itself. This keeps the medication overview understandable for colleagues outside your team. [1] [10] [11]
Organise a complex case around a pain score by first determining for each encounter which source supplied which information, and only then placing functioning, findings and the follow-up under the right headings. Do not add an extra conclusion that the individual encounters do not each support. With several pain scores over time, you set them side by side, so that you assess the course rather than the format already suggesting it. [1] [11] [2] [9]
Hysio creates the report. You remain responsible for what you save in the record.