Non-pharmacological management of infant and young child procedural pain

Clonidine for pain in non-ventilated infants

BACKGROUND

Critically ill newborn infants undergo a variety of painful procedures or experience a variety of painful conditions during their early life in the neonatal unit. In the critically ill paediatric and neonatal population, clonidine is prescribed as an adjunct to opioids or benzodiazepines aiming to reduce the doses of these drugs that are required for analgesia or sedation, or to facilitate weaning from mechanical ventilation. It has been shown that clonidine premedication might have a positive effect on postoperative pain in children.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefit and harms of clonidine for the prevention or treatment of procedural pain; postoperative pain; or pain associated with clinical conditions in non-ventilated neonates.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search the CENTRAL, MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL to December 2018. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials. We ran an updated search from 1 January 2018 to 11 March 2020 in CENTRAL via CRS Web, MEDLINE via Ovid, and CINAHL via EBSCOhost.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, quasi-randomised controlled trials, and cluster trials comparing clonidine to placebo or no treatment, opioids, paracetamol, dexmedetomidine, or non-pharmacological pain-reducing interventions for the management of procedural pain, postoperative pain, and pain associated with clinical conditions in preterm and term newborns.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently planned to extract data (e.g. number of participants, birth weight, gestational age, modality of administration, and dose of clonidine) and assess the risk of bias (e.g. adequacy of randomisation, blinding, completeness of follow-up). The primary outcome considered was pain: for procedural pain, the mean values of each analgesia scale assessed during the procedure and at one to two hours after the procedure; for postoperative pain and for pain associated with clinical conditions, the mean values of each analgesia scale assessed at 30 minutes, three hours, and 12 hours after the administration of the intervention. We planned to use the GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Our search strategy yielded 3383 references. Two review authors independently assessed all references for inclusion. We did not find any completed studies for inclusion. We excluded three trials where clonidine was administered for spinal anaesthesia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find any studies that met our inclusion criteria and hence there is no evidence to recommend or refute the use of clonidine for the prevention or treatment of procedural or postoperative pain, or pain associated with clinical conditions in neonates.

A cluster randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effectiveness of the Implementation of Infant Pain Practice Change (ImPaC) Resource to improve pain practices in hospitalized infants: a study protocol

BACKGROUND

Hospitalized infants undergo multiple painful procedures daily. Despite the significant evidence, procedural pain assessment and management continues to be suboptimal. Repetitive and untreated pain at this vital developmental juncture is associated with negative behavioral and neurodevelopmental consequences. To address this knowledge to practice gap, we developed the web-based Implementation of Infant Pain Practice Change (ImPaC) Resource to guide change in healthcare professionals' pain practice behaviors. This protocol describes the evaluation of the intervention effectiveness and implementation of the Resource and how organizational context influences outcomes.

METHODS

An effectiveness-implementation hybrid type 1 design, blending a cluster randomized clinical trial and a mixed-methods implementation study will be used. Eighteen Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICUs) across Canada will be randomized to intervention (INT) or standard practice (SP) groups. NICUs in the INT group will receive the Resource for six months; those in the SP group will continue with practice as usual and will be offered the Resource after a six-month waiting period. Data analysts will be blinded to group allocation. To address the intervention effectiveness, the INT and SP groups will be compared on clinical outcomes including the proportion of infants who have procedural pain assessed and managed, and the frequency and nature of painful procedures. Data will be collected at baseline (before randomization) and at completion of the intervention (six months). Implementation outcomes (feasibility, fidelity, implementation cost, and reach) will be measured at completion of the intervention. Sustainability will be assessed at six and 12 months following the intervention. Organizational context will be assessed to examine its influence on intervention and implementation outcomes.

DISCUSSION

This mixed-methods study aims to determine the effectiveness and the implementation of a multifaceted online strategy for changing healthcare professionals' pain practices for hospitalized infants. Implementation strategies that are easily and effectively implemented are important for sustained change. The results will inform healthcare professionals and decision-makers on how to address the challenges of implementing the Resource within various organizational contexts.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03825822. Registered 31 January 2019.

Managing pain and distress in children undergoing brief diagnostic and therapeutic procedures

Common medical procedures to assess and treat patients can cause significant pain and distress. Clinicians should have a basic approach for minimizing pain and distress in children, particularly for frequently used diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. This statement focuses on infants (excluding care provided in the NICU), children, and youth who are undergoing common, minor but painful medical procedures. Simple, evidence-based strategies for managing pain and distress are reviewed, with guidance for integrating them into clinical practice as an essential part of health care. Health professionals are encouraged to use minimally invasive approaches and, when painful procedures are unavoidable, to combine simple pain and distress-minimizing strategies to improve the patient, parent, and health care provider experience. Health administrators are encouraged to create institutional policies, improve education and access to guidelines, create child- and youth-friendly environments, ensure availability of appropriate staff, equipment and pharmacological agents, and perform quality audits to ensure pain management is optimal.

The challenge of developing pain medications for children: therapeutic needs and future perspectives

It is broadly accepted that children of all age groups including (preterm) neonates and young infants can perceive pain and that there is an absolute need to treat their pain safely and effectively. The approved treatment options for children, particularly (preterm) neonates and young infants, are very limited with only a few medications specifically labelled for this population. This article presents the challenges of developing pain medications for children. A short overview gives information on pain in children, including pain perception, prevalence of pain and the long-term consequences of leaving pain untreated in this vulnerable population. Current pain management practices are briefly discussed. The challenges of conducting pediatric clinical trials in general and trials involving analgesic medications in particular within the regulatory framework available to develop these medications for children are presented. Emphasis is given to the operational hurdles faced in conducting a pediatric clinical trial program. Some suggestions to overcome these hurdles are provided based on our experience during the pediatric trial program for the strong analgesic tapentadol used for the treatment of moderate to severe acute pain.

Socially Assistive Robots for Helping Pediatric Distress and Pain: A Review of Current Evidence and Recommendations for Future Research and Practice

OBJECTIVES

Interacting with socially assistive robots (SAR) has been shown to influence human behaviors and emotions. This study sought to review the literature on SAR intervention for reducing pediatric distress and pain in medical settings.

METHODS

Databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, Web of Science, Engineering Village, Scopus, Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore) were searched from database inception to January 2018 with the aid of a medical librarian. Included studies examined any SAR intervention for reducing pain or improving emotional well-being in children related to physical or psychiatric care, with outcomes assessed by some quantitative measure. Study quality was assessed using the modified Downs and Black checklist (max. score, 28). The review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016043018).

RESULTS

Eight studies met the eligibility criteria and represented 206 children. Of the 2 studies using Wong-Baker's FACES scale, 1 study claimed to be effective at reducing pain (Cohen d=0.49 to 0.62), while the other appeared effective only when parents and child interacted with SAR together. Distress was evaluated using validated measures in 4 studies, 3 of which showed reduction in distress while one showed no difference. Satisfaction surveys from 4 studies showed that children were interested in using SAR again. Quality scores ranged from 8 to 26.

CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence suggesting that SAR interventions may reduce distress and no clear evidence showing reduction in pain for children in medical settings. Engineers are conducting interventions using SAR in pediatric populations. Health care providers should be engaged in technology research related to children to facilitate testing and improve the effectiveness of these systems.

Pain, Parental Involvement, and Oxytocin in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit

Preterm infants (PTI) typically experience many painful and stressful procedures or events during their first weeks of life in a neonatal intensive care unit, and these can profoundly impact subsequent brain development and function. Several protective interventions during this sensitive period stimulate the oxytocin system, reduce pain and stress, and improve brain development. This review provides an overview of the environmental risk factors experienced by PTI during hospitalization, with a focus on the effects of pain, and early maternal separation. We also describe the long-term adverse effects of the simultaneous experiences of pain and maternal separation, and the potential beneficial effects of maternal vocalizations, parental contact, and several related processes, which appear to be mediated by the oxytocin system.

Pharmacological and nonpharmacological measures of pain management and treatment among neonates

Objective

This study sought to describe and quantify the pharmacological and nonpharmacological strategies used to relieve the pain/stress of neonates during hospitalization in neonatal intensive care units.

Methods

This quantitative, longitudinal, and descriptive study examined 50 neonates from neonatal intensive care unit admission to discharge.

Results

A total of 9,948 painful/stressful procedures were recorded (mean = 11.25 ± 6.3) per day per neonate. A total of 11,722 pain-management and relief interventions were performed, of which 11,495 (98.1%) were nonpharmacological strategies, and 227 (1.9%) were pharmacological interventions. On average, each neonate received 235 pain-management and treatment interventions during hospitalization, 13 nonpharmacological interventions per day, and one pharmacological intervention every 2 days.

Conclusion

Neonates receive few specific measures for pain relief given the high number of painful and stressful procedures performed during hospitalization. Thus, it is essential to implement effective pain-relief protocols.

Reducing toxic stress in the neonatal intensive care unit to improve infant outcomes

In 2011, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) published a technical report on the lifelong effects of early toxic stress on human development, and included a new framework for promoting pediatric health: the Ecobiodevelopmental Framework for Early Childhood Policies and Programs. We believe that hospitalization is a specific form of toxic stress for the neonatal patient, and that toxic stress must be addressed by the nursing profession in order to substantially improve outcomes for the critically ill neonate. Approximately 4% of normal birthweight newborns and 85% of low birthweight newborns are hospitalized each year in the highly technological neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Neonates are exposed to roughly 70 stressful procedures a day during hospitalization, which can permanently and negatively alter the infant's developing brain. Neurologic deficits can be partly attributed to the frequent, toxic, and cumulative exposure to stressors during NICU hospitalization. However, the AAP report does not provide specific action steps necessary to address toxic stress in the NICU and realize the new vision for pediatric health care outlined therein. Therefore, this paper applies the concepts and vision laid out in the AAP report to the care of the hospitalized neonate and provides action steps for true transformative change in neonatal intensive care. We review how the environment of the NICU is a significant source of toxic stress for hospitalized infants. We provide recommendations for caregiving practices that could significantly buffer the toxic stress experienced by hospitalized infants. We also identify areas of research inquiry that are needed to address gaps in nursing knowledge and to propel nursing science forward. Finally, we advocate for several public policies that are not fully addressed in the AAP technical report, but are vital to the health and development of all newborns.

Vascular access in children

Securing stable vascular access is an important clinical skill for the anaesthesiologist. Sick children, complex surgeries, chronic illnesses, multiple hospitalisations, and prolonged treatments can make vascular access challenging. A search was done in the English language literature using the keywords "paediatric," "vascular access," "venous access," and "techniques" or "complications" in Pubmed, Embase, and Google scholar databases. Articles were screened and appropriate content was included. Intraosseous access is a lifesaving technique that can be performed even in hypovolaemic patients rapidly. Transillumination and near-infrared light improve visualisation of superficial veins in difficult access. Ultrasonography has become the standard of care in selecting the vessel, size of catheter, guide placement, and prevent complications. Fluoroscopy is used during insertion of long-term vascular access devices. This article reviews the various routes of access, their indications, most appropriate site, securing techniques, advantages, disadvantages, and complications associated with vascular access in children.

Needle-related pain and distress management during needle-related procedures in children with and without intellectual disability

Children with intellectual disability frequently undergo needle-related procedures for diagnosis or treatment. Nevertheless, only a few studies deal with pain and distress management during the procedure in this population of children. This study aimed to investigate the number of anxiety and pain management techniques performed during needle procedure in children with intellectual disability (cases) compared to a population of children without intellectual disability (controls). This multicenter cohort study was performed from July 2016 to January 2018 in the pediatric ward of four urban hospitals in Italy. Eligible subjects were children with and without intellectual disability, from 4 to 17 years old, who needed venipuncture or intravenous cannulation for diagnosis or treatment. Use of topical anesthesia, distraction techniques, and physical or verbal comfort during procedures were recorded. Pain and anxiety scores were also recorded. Forty-seven cases and 94 controls were recruited. Three pain- and anxiety-relieving techniques were performed during the procedure in 12 (25%) cases and in 10 controls (11%); two techniques were performed in 23 (50%) cases and in 26 (28%) controls; 12 (25%) cases and 52 (55%) controls received only one.Conclusion: In this series, children with intellectual disability received significantly more relieving techniques, but experienced more pain and anxiety when compared to children without intellectual disability. What is Known: • Children with intellectual disability experience more episodes of pain than cognitively healthy ones, and almost 10% of these episodes are due to medical procedures. What is New: • Children with intellectual disability despite receiving more relieving techniques during a needle-related procedure experienced more pain and anxiety when compared to healthy children.

Children's Pain and Distress at a Public Influenza Vaccination Clinic: A Parent Survey and Public Observation Study

Immunizations are a necessary but distressing and painful procedure that most infants and children regularly undergo. Each year, a tertiary pediatric hospital in Canada holds an influenza vaccination clinic for all staff and their families. Evidence-based interventions to reduce pain and distress in babies and children are used. Despite this, infants and children continue to be distressed throughout the vaccination procedure. The objectives of this study were to: (1) measure the prevalence of distress among infants and children before, during, and after vaccine administration at the clinic, and (2) evaluate parents' perception of their child(ren)'s distress before, during, and after vaccine administration and the effectiveness of pain management interventions used during the clinic. A cross-sectional design of naturalistic observation and parent surveys was used and data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. A total of 283 children between 6 months and 18 years were vaccinated at the clinic, with 52% observed to be distressed before, during, or after the procedure. There were 115 parents of 206 children that completed the survey; 47% of these parents perceived that their children were distressed before, during, or after vaccination, and 42% perceived that the pain treatments used for their child(ren) were very effective. The results of this study will continue to inform interventions for needle-related pain and distress management, as well as improvements for future public vaccination clinics.

Psychological interventions for needle-related procedural pain and distress in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

This is the second update of a Cochrane Review (Issue 4, 2006). Pain and distress from needle-related procedures are common during childhood and can be reduced through use of psychological interventions (cognitive or behavioral strategies, or both). Our first review update (Issue 10, 2013) showed efficacy of distraction and hypnosis for needle-related pain and distress in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of psychological interventions for needle-related procedural pain and distress in children and adolescents.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched six electronic databases for relevant trials: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; PsycINFO; Embase; Web of Science (ISI Web of Knowledge); and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). We sent requests for additional studies to pediatric pain and child health electronic listservs. We also searched registries for relevant completed trials: clinicaltrials.gov; and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int.trialsearch). We conducted searches up to September 2017 to identify records published since the last review update in 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included peer-reviewed published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with at least five participants per study arm, comparing a psychological intervention with a control or comparison group. Trials involved children aged two to 19 years undergoing any needle-related medical procedure.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data and assessed risks of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We examined pain and distress assessed by child self-report, observer global report, and behavioral measurement (primary outcomes). We also examined any reported physiological outcomes and adverse events (secondary outcomes). We used meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of identified psychological interventions relative to a comparator (i.e. no treatment, other active treatment, treatment as usual, or waitlist) for each outcome separately. We used Review Manager 5 software to compute standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 59 trials (20 new for this update) with 5550 participants. Needle procedures primarily included venipuncture, intravenous insertion, and vaccine injections. Studies included children aged two to 19 years, with few trials focused on adolescents. The most common psychological interventions were distraction (n = 32), combined cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT; n = 18), and hypnosis (n = 8). Preparation/information (n = 4), breathing (n = 4), suggestion (n = 3), and memory alteration (n = 1) were also included. Control groups were often 'standard care', which varied across studies. Across all studies, 'Risk of bias' scores indicated several domains at high or unclear risk, most notably allocation concealment, blinding of participants and outcome assessment, and selective reporting. We downgraded the quality of evidence largely due to serious study limitations, inconsistency, and imprecision.Very low- to low-quality evidence supported the efficacy of distraction for self-reported pain (n = 30, 2802 participants; SMD -0.56, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.33) and distress (n = 4, 426 participants; SMD -0.82, 95% CI -1.45 to -0.18), observer-reported pain (n = 11, 1512 participants; SMD -0.62, 95% CI -1.00 to -0.23) and distress (n = 5, 1067 participants; SMD -0.72, 95% CI -1.41 to -0.03), and behavioral distress (n = 7, 500 participants; SMD -0.44, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.04). Distraction was not efficacious for behavioral pain (n = 4, 309 participants; SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.69 to 0.03). Very low-quality evidence indicated hypnosis was efficacious for reducing self-reported pain (n = 5, 176 participants; SMD -1.40, 95% CI -2.32 to -0.48) and distress (n = 5, 176 participants; SMD -2.53, 95% CI -3.93 to -1.12), and behavioral distress (n = 6, 193 participants; SMD -1.15, 95% CI -1.76 to -0.53), but not behavioral pain (n = 2, 69 participants; SMD -0.38, 95% CI -1.57 to 0.81). No studies assessed hypnosis for observer-reported pain and only one study assessed observer-reported distress. Very low- to low-quality evidence supported the efficacy of combined CBT for observer-reported pain (n = 4, 385 participants; SMD -0.52, 95% CI -0.73 to -0.30) and behavioral distress (n = 11, 1105 participants; SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.67 to -0.14), but not self-reported pain (n = 14, 1359 participants; SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.58 to 0.03), self-reported distress (n = 6, 234 participants; SMD -0.26, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.04), observer-reported distress (n = 6, 765 participants; SMD 0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.50), or behavioral pain (n = 2, 95 participants; SMD -0.65, 95% CI -2.36 to 1.06). Very low-quality evidence showed efficacy of breathing interventions for self-reported pain (n = 4, 298 participants; SMD -1.04, 95% CI -1.86 to -0.22), but there were too few studies for meta-analysis of other outcomes. Very low-quality evidence revealed no effect for preparation/information (n = 4, 313 participants) or suggestion (n = 3, 218 participants) for any pain or distress outcome. Given only a single trial, we could draw no conclusions about memory alteration. Adverse events of respiratory difficulties were only reported in one breathing intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We identified evidence supporting the efficacy of distraction, hypnosis, combined CBT, and breathing interventions for reducing children's needle-related pain or distress, or both. Support for the efficacy of combined CBT and breathing interventions is new from our last review update due to the availability of new evidence. The quality of trials and overall evidence remains low to very low, underscoring the need for improved methodological rigor and trial reporting. Despite low-quality evidence, the potential benefits of reduced pain or distress or both support the evidence in favor of using these interventions in clinical practice.

Efficacy of the Buzzy System for pain relief during venipuncture in children: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE WORK

procedural pain is a significant issue for paediatric patients. In particular, needle pain is amongst the most stressful for children. Studies revealed that a large number of children do not receive adequate pain prevention during the procedures. Neglecting the prevention of needle pain can cause several psychological effects such as anxiety and phobias, and increase perceptions of pain in the future. We aimed to verify the efficacy of Buzzy System in reducing pain during venipuncture.

METHODS

A randomized control trial was conducted among 72 children aged 3 to 10 years undergoing venipuncture. Children were randomly assigned to The Buzzy with distraction cards group (experimental group) or to "magic gloves" group (control group). Perception of pain was measured through the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), the Wong-Baker Scale (WBS) and the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS).

RESULTS

Sixty-four children participated in the study, 34 in the experimental group and 30 in the control group. The experimental group showed significantly lower levels of pain (p=.039; 95% CI: -2,11; -0,06) in terms of the mean=3.65±2.011; median=3, compared to the control group (mean: 4.67±2.14, median=4). Caregivers were satisfied with the Buzzy System.

CONCLUSION

The Buzzy System combined to distraction cards showed a greater reduction of perceived pain than "magic glove" technique. This study underlines the importance of active involvement of caregivers during procedural pain in children. Pediatric nurses have an important role in empowering children and caregivers to be interactive during venipunctures.

Understanding the Relative Contributions of Sensitive and Insensitive Parent Behaviors on Infant Vaccination Pain

Parents play a critical role in supporting infants' ability to manage strong emotions. Routine vaccinations provide an ideal context to observe the effect of parents' behaviors on infants' pain-related distress. Previous research in the vaccination context showed that parent sensitivity, operationalized by variables such as emotional availability and proximal soothing behaviors, is associated with infant pain-related distress behavior. However, the magnitudes of these relationships were smaller than expected given the established importance of parents in the development of distress regulation. In recent work, a reliable and valid measure to operationalize insensitive behaviors was developed. The objective of the current study was to examine the relative contribution of variables representing sensitive and insensitive behaviors to the prediction of infant pain-related distress behaviors during the reactivity and regulation phases of needle pain. Archival data was used to analyze a subsample of infants followed during their two-month, six-month, and 12-month vaccinations (n= 81). Results of regression analyses indicated that parent insensitive behaviors generally had the strongest relationships with pain outcomes across all ages, with a greater influence on regulation-phase pain-related distress behavior, rather than reactivity-phase pain-related distress behavior. Our findings support the utility of a measure of distress-promoting parent behaviors in a vaccination context, and highlight the potential value of this measure for clinicians and researchers.

The minimally effective dose of sucrose for procedural pain relief in neonates: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Orally administered sucrose is effective and safe in reducing pain intensity during single, tissue-damaging procedures in neonates, and is commonly recommended in neonatal pain guidelines. However, there is wide variability in sucrose doses examined in research, and more than a 20-fold variation across neonatal care settings. The aim of this study was to determine the minimally effective dose of 24% sucrose for reducing pain in hospitalized neonates undergoing a single skin-breaking heel lance procedure.

Methods

A total of 245 neonates from 4 Canadian tertiary neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), born between 24 and 42 weeks gestational age (GA), were prospectively randomized to receive one of three doses of 24% sucrose, plus non-nutritive sucking/pacifier, 2 min before a routine heel lance: 0.1 ml (Group 1; n = 81), 0.5 ml (Group 2; n = 81), or 1.0 ml (Group 3; n = 83). The primary outcome was pain intensity measured at 30 and 60 s following the heel lance, using the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R). The secondary outcome was the incidence of adverse events. Analysis of covariance models, adjusting for GA and study site examined between group differences in pain intensity across intervention groups.

Results

There was no difference in mean pain intensity PIPP-R scores between treatment groups at 30 s (P = .97) and 60 s (P = .93); however, pain was not fully eliminated during the heel lance procedure. There were 5 reported adverse events among 5/245 (2.0%) neonates, with no significant differences in the proportion of events by sucrose dose (P = .62). All events resolved spontaneously without medical intervention.

Conclusions

The minimally effective dose of 24% sucrose required to treat pain associated with a single heel lance in neonates was 0.1 ml. Further evaluation regarding the sustained effectiveness of this dose in reducing pain intensity in neonates for repeated painful procedures is warranted.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02134873. Date: May 5, 2014 (retrospectively registered).

Olfactive stimulation interventions for managing procedural pain in preterm and full-term neonates: a systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND

While hospitalized in the NICU, preterm neonates undergo many painful procedures. This may be the same for full-term neonates when longer hospitalization is required. Untreated and repeated pain has short-term as well as long-term consequences for these neonates. Pharmacological pain management methods have many limitations in their applications for both preterm and full-term neonates. A combination of different non-pharmacological methods is recommended for pain management. The effect of olfactive stimulation as a non-pharmacological pain management method was investigated by a few studies in the past years with premature and term neonates, but no systematic review has been conducted. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the effect of olfactive stimulation intervention on the pain response of preterm and full-term neonates during painful procedures.

METHODS

An electronic search will be conducted in various databases such as PubMed (1946 to date), MEDLINE (1946 to date), CINAHL (1981 to date), Embase (1947 to date), PsycINFO (1806 to date), Web of Science (1945 to date), CENTRAL and Scopus (1960 to date), and Proquest, without restriction for the year of publication. Only studies published in English or French will be included. The search will be conducted using the following three concepts: pain, odors, and neonates. Selection of articles, data extraction, and assessment of risk of bias will be conducted by two independent researchers. A third researcher will intervene in case of disagreement. According to the availability of studies and data homogeneity, the results will be combined to perform a meta-analysis, or they will be described by a narrative synthesis.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review will provide light on the current state of knowledge on the effectiveness of olfactive stimulation interventions for managing pain in preterm and full-term neonates. This review will guide clinical practice as well as research to improve preterm and full-term neonates' pain management and prevent short-term and long-term complications caused by pain.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42017058021.

Systematic Review: A Systematic Review of the Interrelationships Among Children's Coping Responses, Children's Coping Outcomes, and Parent Cognitive-Affective, Behavioral, and Contextual Variables in the Needle-Related Procedures Context

Objective

To conduct a systematic review of the interrelationships between children's coping responses, children's coping outcomes, and parent variables during needle-related procedures.   A systematic literature search was conducted. It was required that the study examined a painful needle-related procedure in children from 3 to 12 years of age, and included a children's coping response, a children's coping outcome, and a parent variable. In all, 6,081 articles were retrieved to review against inclusion criteria. Twenty studies were included.   Parent coping-promoting behaviors and distress-promoting behaviors enacted in combination are the most consistent predictors of optimal children's coping responses, and less optimal children's coping outcomes, respectively. Additional key findings are presented.   Children's coping with needle-related procedures is a complex process involving a variety of different dimensions that interact in unison. Parents play an important role in this process. Future researchers are encouraged to disentangle coping responses from coping outcomes when exploring this dynamic process.

A Longitudinal Randomized Trial of the Effect of Consistent Pain Management for Infant Vaccinations on Future Vaccination Distress

The objective was to determine if consistent pain management during vaccine injections has a beneficial effect on future infant pain reactivity. This was a multicenter, longitudinal, double-blind, double-dummy, add-on, randomized controlled trial. Healthy infants were randomized to 1 of 4 add-on pain management regimens for all vaccinations in the first year of life: 1) placebo control (standard care), 2) parent video education about infant soothing (video), 3) video and oral sucrose solution (sucrose), 4) video and sucrose and topical liposomal lidocaine (lidocaine). At 15-month vaccinations, all active pain interventions were administered (video and sucrose and lidocaine); however, individuals remained blinded to the original treatments given. Pain at 15 months was evaluated during 3 procedure phases (baseline, needle injection, and recovery) by a researcher unaware of group allocation using a validated measure, the Modified Behavioural Pain Scale (range, 0-10). Altogether, 352 infants participated; characteristics did not differ among groups (P > .05). Pain scores did not differ among groups during baseline (P = .642), needle injection (P = .739), or recovery (P = .750) phases. In conclusion, there was no evidence of a long-term benefit of consistent use of pain interventions in the first year of life on future infant pain responsivity at 15-month vaccinations.

PERSPECTIVE

This randomized controlled trial did not find a long-term benefit of consistent pain management during infant vaccinations on future infant pain responsivity at 15 months. The results are relevant to clinicians and researchers studying and evaluating pain interventions in children undergoing medical procedures.

Infant pacifiers for reduction in risk of sudden infant death syndrome

BACKGROUND

Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) has been most recently defined as the sudden unexpected death of an infant less than one year of age, with onset of the fatal episode apparently occurring during sleep, that remains unexplained after a thorough investigation, including the performance of a complete autopsy and a review of the circumstances of death and clinical history. Despite the success of several prevention campaigns, SIDS remains a leading cause of infant mortality. In 1994, a 'triple risk model' for SIDS was proposed that described SIDS as an event that results from the intersection of three factors: a vulnerable infant; a critical development period in homeostatic control (age related); and an exogenous stressor. The association between pacifier (dummy) use and reduced incidence of SIDS has been shown in epidemiological studies since the early 1990s. Pacifier use, given its low cost, might be a cost-effective intervention for SIDS prevention if it is confirmed effective in randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the use of pacifiers during sleep versus no pacifier during sleep reduces the risk of SIDS.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2016, Issue 2), MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL to 16 March 2016. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published and unpublished controlled trials using random and quasi-random allocations of infants born at term and at preterm (less than 37 weeks' gestation) or with low birth weight (< 2500 g). Infants must have been randomised by one month' postmenstrual age. We planned to include studies reported only by abstracts, and cluster and cross-over randomised trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed studies from searches. We found no eligible studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no randomised controlled trials examining infant pacifiers for reduction in risk of SIDS.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no randomised control trial evidence on which to support or refute the use of pacifiers for the prevention of SIDS.

Skin-to-skin care for procedural pain in neonates

BACKGROUND

Skin-to-skin care (SSC), often referred to as 'kangaroo care' (KC) due to its similarity with marsupial behaviour of ventral maternal-infant contact, is one non-pharmacological intervention for pain control in infants.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objectives were to determine the effect of SSC alone on pain from medical or nursing procedures in neonates compared to no intervention, sucrose or other analgesics, or additions to simple SSC such as rocking; and to determine the effects of the amount of SSC (duration in minutes), method of administration (e.g. who provided the SSC) of SSC in reducing pain from medical or nursing procedures in neonatesThe secondary objectives were to determine the safety of SSC care for relieving procedural pain in infants; and to compare the SSC effect in different postmenstrual age subgroups of infants.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review group to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 1); MEDLINE via PubMed (1966 to 25 February 2016); Embase (1980 to 25 February 2016); and CINAHL (1982 to 25 February 2016). We also searched clinical trials' databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies with randomisation or quasi-randomisation, double- or single-blinded, involving term infants (≥ 37 completed weeks' postmenstrual age (PMA) to a maximum of 44 weeks' PMA and preterm infants (< 37 completed weeks PMA) receiving SSC for painful procedures conducted by healthcare professionals.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The main outcome measures were physiological or behavioural pain indicators and composite pain scores. A mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using a fixed-effect model was reported for continuous outcome measures. We included variations on type of tissue-damaging procedure, provider of care, and duration of SSC.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-five studies (n = 2001 infants) were included. Nineteen studies (n = 1065) used heel lance as the painful procedure, one study combined venepuncture and heel stick (n = 50), three used intramuscular injection (n = 776), one used 'vaccination' (n = 60), and one used tape removal (n = 50). The studies were generally strong and had low or uncertain risk of bias. Blinding of the intervention was not possible, making them subject to high risk, depending on the method of scoring outcomes.Seventeen studies (n = 810) compared SSC to a no-treatment control. Although 15 studies measured heart rate during painful procedures, data from only five studies (n = 161) could be combined for a mean difference (MD) of -10.78 beats per minute (95% CI -13.63 to -7.93) favouring SSC. Meta-analysis of four studies (n = 120) showed no difference in heart rate following the painful procedure (MD 0.08, 95% CI -4.39 to 4.55). Two studies (n = 38) reported heart rate variability with no significant differences. Two studies (n = 101) in a meta-analysis on oxygen saturation at 30 and 60 seconds following the painful procedure did not show a difference. Duration of crying meta-analysis was performed on four studies (n = 133): two (n = 33) investigated response to heel lance (MD = -34.16, 95% CI -42.86 to -25.45), and two (n = 100) following IM injection (MD = -8.83, 95% CI -14.63 to -3.02), favouring SSC. Five studies, one consisting of two substudies (n = 267), used the Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) as a primary outcome, which favoured SCC at 30 seconds (MD -3.21, 95% CI -3.94 to -2.47), at 60 seconds (3 studies; n = 156) (MD -1.64, 95% CI -2.86 to -0.43), and at 90 seconds (n = 156) (MD -1.28, 95% CI -2.53 to -0.04); but at 120 seconds there was no difference (n = 156) (MD 0.07, 95% CI -1.11 to 1.25). No studies on return of heart rate to baseline level, cortisol levels, and facial actions could be combined for meta-analysis findings.Eight studies compared SSC to another intervention with or without a no-treatment control. Two cross-over studies (n = 80) compared mother versus other provider (father, another female) on PIPP scores at 30, 60, 90, and 120 seconds with no significant difference. When SSC was compared to other interventions, there were not enough similar studies to pool results in an analysis. One study compared SSC (n = 640) with and without dextrose and found that the combination was most effective and that SSC alone was more effective than dextrose alone. Similarly, in another study SSC was more effective than oral glucose for heart rate (n = 95). SSC either in combination with breastfeeding or alone was favoured over a no-treatment control, but not different to breastfeeding. One study compared SSC alone and in combination with both sucrose and breastfeeding on heart rate (HR), NIPS scores, and crying time (n = 127). The combinations were more effective than SSC alone for NIPS and crying. Expressed breast milk was compared to SSC in one study (n = 50) and found both equally effective on PIPP scores. There were not enough participants with similar outcomes and painful procedures to compare age groups or duration of SSC. No adverse events were reported in any of the studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

SSC appears to be effective as measured by composite pain indicators with both physiological and behavioural indicators and, independently, using heart rate and crying time; and safe for a single painful procedure. Purely behavioural indicators tended to favour SSC but with facial actions there is greater possibility of observers not being blinded. Physiological indicators were mixed although the common measure of heart rate favoured SSC. Two studies compared mother-providers to others, with non-significant results. There was more heterogeneity in the studies with behavioural or composite outcomes. There is a need for replication studies that use similar, clearly defined outcomes. Studies examining optimal duration of SSC, gestational age groups, repeated use, and long-term effects of SSC are needed. Of interest would be to study synergistic effects of SSC with other interventions.

Effects of combined oral sucrose and nonnutritive sucking (NNS) on procedural pain of NICU newborns, 2001 to 2016: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Both oral sucrose (OS) and nonnutritive sucking (NNS) are effective nonpharmacological methods to alleviate procedures pain in neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) newborns when they were used alone, but the combined effect of OS+NNS remains controversial. So, we conducted this study to evaluate the efficiency of NNS combined with oral sucrose on pain relief in NICU newborns undergoing painful procedures.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Ovid (Medline), Embase (Medline), Cochrane Central Library, and other resources such as Google Scholar, bibliographies of included literatures for all available articles. Two reviewers screened literatures and extracted data independently. The fixed effects model was used to pool the results using Reviewer Manager (RevMan) 5.3. As each study included in our meta-analysis had been approved by Ethics Committee or institutional review board, thus our study did not need ethical approval.

RESULTS

Seven randomized controlled trials, including 599 participants, were contained in our meta-analysis. The combination of oral sucrose and NNS is associated with reduced pain scores (mean difference [MD], -0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.68 to -0.36); shortened crying time (MD,-0.92; 95% CI, -1.39 to -0.44); but the 2 groups did not differ significantly in reducing bradycardia (MD, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.32-1.68), tachycardia (MD, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.38-1.10), or desaturations (MD, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.32-1.68).

CONCLUSION

The pooled evidence indicates that the combination measures may serve as an evidence-based guideline for pain relief among patients having minor pain. Besides, it also indicates that OS combined with NNS can be an alternative for better prevention and management of procedure pain in NICU newborns. Nevertheless, the results may be limited due to incomplete data, and thus, more randomized controlled trials or well-designed studies are required to determine the effects of OS+NNS in the future.

Comparative Survey of Holding Positions for Reducing Vaccination Pain in Young Infants

Background. Infant holding position may reduce vaccination pain. However, the optimal position for young infants remains controversial. Objectives. To compare the effectiveness of holding infants in the supine position and the effectiveness of holding infants in upright position for relieving acute pain from vaccine injection. Methods. This prospective cohort study enrolled 6-12-week-old healthy infants. We examined infant pain responses by evaluating the following three categories: (1) crying, (2) irritability, and (3) facial expression. Results. In total, 282 infants were enrolled, with 103 and 179 held in the supine and upright positions, respectively. At 30 s after vaccination, the infants in the supine position showed a larger decrease in crying (p < 0.001), irritability (p = 0.002), and pained facial expression (p = 0.001) than did those in the upright position. However, there was no significant difference in pain response between two groups at 180 s after intervention. Conclusion. In 2-month-old infants, the supine position may reduce acute pain more effectively than does the upright position. Our findings provide a clinical strategy for relieving vaccination pain in young infants.

Defining Procedural Distress in the NICU and What Can Be Done About It

Procedural distress is a common occurrence in the NICU and is tied to attempts to support the life and development of vulnerable premature infants. We discuss the epidemiology of procedural distress and the potential negative consequences on infant neurodevelopment. We define procedural distress in the NICU and outline three approaches to limit or to reduce its detrimental effects including minimizing the number of procedures, instituting measures for developmentally supportive care, and using preemptively pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic analgesia. Despite the pervasiveness of procedural distress in the NICU, clinical and administrative measures are available to ameliorate possible harmful outcomes.

Relative effectiveness of additive pain interventions during vaccination in infants

BACKGROUND

Vaccine injections can cause acute pain and distress in infants, which can contribute to dissatisfaction with the vaccination experience and vaccine hesitancy. We sought to compare the effectiveness of additive pain interventions administered consistently during vaccine injections in the first year of life.

METHODS

We conducted a multicentre, longitudinal, double-blind, add-on, randomized controlled trial. Healthy infants were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 levels of pain management for all vaccine injections at 2, 4, 6 and 12 months: (i) placebo control; (ii) parent-directed video education about infant soothing; (iii) the video plus sucrose administered orally or (iv) the video plus sucrose plus liposomal lidocaine applied topically. All infants benefit from injection techniques that minimize pain. We used a double-dummy design; hence all parents watched a video (active psychological intervention or placebo) and all infants received oral solution (sucrose or placebo) and topical cream (lidocaine or placebo). We assessed infant distress during 3 phases - preinjection (baseline), vaccine injection (needle), and 1 minute postinjection (recovery) - using the Modified Behavioural Pain Scale (range 0-10). We compared scores between groups and across infant ages using a mixed-model repeated-measures analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 352 infants participated in the study, from Jan. 17, 2012, to Feb. 2, 2016. Demographics did not differ among intervention groups (p > 0.05). Baseline pain scores did not differ among intervention groups (p = 0.4), but did differ across ages (p < 0.001). Needle pain scores differed among groups (p = 0.003) and across ages (p < 0.001). The mean (± standard deviation) needle score was 6.3 (± 0.8) in the video-sucrose-lidocaine group compared with 6.7 (± 0.8) in each of the other groups. There were no other between-group differences. Recovery scores did not differ among groups (p = 0.98), but did differ across ages (p < 0.001).

INTERPRETATION

Only liposomal lidocaine provided consistent analgesia within an additive pain intervention regimen during vaccinations in infants. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT01503060.

Sucrose for analgesia in newborn infants undergoing painful procedures

BACKGROUND

Administration of oral sucrose with and without non-nutritive sucking is the most frequently studied non-pharmacological intervention for procedural pain relief in neonates.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy, effect of dose, method of administration and safety of sucrose for relieving procedural pain in neonates as assessed by validated composite pain scores, physiological pain indicators (heart rate, respiratory rate, saturation of peripheral oxygen in the blood, transcutaneous oxygen and carbon dioxide (gas exchange measured across the skin - TcpO2, TcpCO2), near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), electroencephalogram (EEG), or behavioural pain indicators (cry duration, proportion of time crying, proportion of time facial actions (e.g. grimace) are present), or a combination of these and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal. We performed electronic and manual literature searches in February 2016 for published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2016), MEDLINE (1950 to 2016), EMBASE (1980 to 2016), and CINAHL (1982 to 2016). We did not impose language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs in which term or preterm neonates (postnatal age maximum of 28 days after reaching 40 weeks' postmenstrual age), or both, received sucrose for procedural pain. Control interventions included no treatment, water, glucose, breast milk, breastfeeding, local anaesthetic, pacifier, positioning/containing or acupuncture.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Our main outcome measures were composite pain scores (including a combination of behavioural, physiological and contextual indicators). Secondary outcomes included separate physiological and behavioural pain indicators. We reported a mean difference (MD) or weighted MD (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed-effect model for continuous outcome measures. For categorical data we used risk ratio (RR) and risk difference. We assessed heterogeneity by the I(2) test. We assessed the risk of bias of included trials using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE system.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-four studies enrolling 7049 infants were included. Results from only a few studies could be combined in meta-analyses and for most analyses the GRADE assessments indicated low- or moderate-quality evidence. There was high-quality evidence for the beneficial effect of sucrose (24%) with non-nutritive sucking (pacifier dipped in sucrose) or 0.5 mL of sucrose orally in preterm and term infants: Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) 30 s after heel lance WMD -1.70 (95% CI -2.13 to -1.26; I(2) = 0% (no heterogeneity); 3 studies, n = 278); PIPP 60 s after heel lance WMD -2.14 (95% CI -3.34 to -0.94; I(2) = 0% (no heterogeneity; 2 studies, n = 164). There was high-quality evidence for the use of 2 mL 24% sucrose prior to venipuncture: PIPP during venipuncture WMD -2.79 (95% CI -3.76 to -1.83; I(2) = 0% (no heterogeneity; 2 groups in 1 study, n = 213); and intramuscular injections: PIPP during intramuscular injection WMD -1.05 (95% CI -1.98 to -0.12; I(2) = 0% (2 groups in 1 study, n = 232). Evidence from studies that could not be included in RevMan-analyses supported these findings. Reported adverse effects were minor and similar in the sucrose and control groups. Sucrose is not effective in reducing pain from circumcision. The effectiveness of sucrose for reducing pain/stress from other interventions such as arterial puncture, subcutaneous injection, insertion of nasogastric or orogastric tubes, bladder catherization, eye examinations and echocardiography examinations are inconclusive. Most trials indicated some benefit of sucrose use but that the evidence for other painful procedures is of lower quality as it is based on few studies of small sample sizes. The effects of sucrose on long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes are unknown.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Sucrose is effective for reducing procedural pain from single events such as heel lance, venipuncture and intramuscular injection in both preterm and term infants. No serious side effects or harms have been documented with this intervention. We could not identify an optimal dose due to inconsistency in effective sucrose dosage among studies. Further investigation of repeated administration of sucrose in neonates is needed. There is some moderate-quality evidence that sucrose in combination with other non-pharmacological interventions such as non-nutritive sucking is more effective than sucrose alone, but more research of this and sucrose in combination with pharmacological interventions is needed. Sucrose use in extremely preterm, unstable, ventilated (or a combination of these) neonates needs to be addressed. Additional research is needed to determine the minimally effective dose of sucrose during a single painful procedure and the effect of repeated sucrose administration on immediate (pain intensity) and long-term (neurodevelopmental) outcomes.

Yakson touch as a part of early intervention in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: A systematic narrative review

Yakson is a Korean therapeutic touch given to neonates and infants by caressing their abdomen with one hand while the other hand is placed on the back of the neonate\infant either to relieve their pain or to calm them down. It was traditionally used by Koreans by caressing the aching body part of their children with a belief that it would relieve their pain. In spite of clinical evidence of its usefulness, there is limited literature available on Yakson touch. A systematic narrative review (SNR) was undertaken on studies that were carried out on the effectiveness of Yakson touch on infants and neonates. Only seven studies were detected from five major electronic databases, searched with the keywords: “Yakson,“ “Yakson touch,” and “Yakson in neonates”. One of the studies has been included in two Cochrane reviews by the same group of researchers published in 2011 and 2015, respectively, and also in a literature review. The evidence from these articles suggests that Yakson touch is able to increase the sleep scores of infants, affects their behavioral response, decreases the stress levels, increases maternal attachment, and has calming effects on them. However, the number of studies is limited, and thus the efficacy of this intervention has not been sufficiently established. Hence, there is a definite need for future studies to prove the efficacy of Yakson to include it in the early intervention programs. This SNR is aimed at compiling the studies which determined to prove the efficacy of the intervention of Yakson.

Methodology for Knowledge Synthesis of the Management of Vaccination Pain and Needle Fear

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background:

A knowledge synthesis was undertaken to inform the development of a revised and expanded clinical practice guideline about managing vaccination pain in children to include the management of pain across the lifespan and the management of fear in individuals with high levels of needle fear. This manuscript describes the methodological details of the knowledge synthesis and presents the list of included clinical questions, critical and important outcomes, search strategy, and search strategy results.

Methods:

The Grading of Assessments, Recommendations, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and Cochrane methodologies provided the general framework. The project team voted on clinical questions for inclusion and critically important and important outcomes. A broad search strategy was used to identify relevant randomized-controlled trials and quasi-randomized-controlled trials. Quality of research evidence was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and quality across studies was assessed using GRADE. Multiple measures of the same construct within studies (eg, observer-rated and parent-rated infant distress) were combined before pooling. The standardized mean difference and 95% confidence intervals (CI) or relative risk and 95% CI was used to express the effects of an intervention.

Results:

Altogether, 55 clinical questions were selected for inclusion in the knowledge synthesis; 49 pertained to pain management during vaccine injections and 6 pertained to fear management in individuals with high levels of needle fear. Pain, fear, and distress were typically prioritized as critically important outcomes across clinical questions. The search strategy identified 136 relevant studies.

Conclusions:

This manuscript describes the methodological details of a knowledge synthesis about pain management during vaccination and fear management in individuals with high levels of needle fear. Subsequent manuscripts in this series will present the results for the included questions.

The validity and reliability of the EValuation of INtervention Scale: preliminary report

AIM

Pain management is a priority for infants receiving neonatal care as they undergo many necessary painful and stressful interventions, which are associated with negative short- or long-term consequences. This study aims to validate the content, and test the reliability, of the EValuation of INtervention Scale (EVIN), which is designed to evaluate the use of widely recommended nonpharmacological strategies to reduce neonatal pain and stress during procedures.

METHODS

The content of the EVIN was validated with multidisciplinary participation (N = 80), and consistency was established via observations on preterm infants (N = 12, at 31-34 weeks' gestation) during interventions in a neonatal unit. A revised scale was tested for inter-rater reliability with observations of invasive (blood sampling, N = 16) and noninvasive (nappy change, N = 18) interventions. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to determine inter-rater reliability. SPSS (PASW Statistics) version 18 was used for analysis.

RESULTS

Very good intraclass correlation coefficients (>0.8) for both invasive (0.962) and noninvasive procedures (0.970) were achieved.

CONCLUSION

These results indicate that the EVIN is suitable for the evaluation of nonpharmacological support during painful or stressful interventions.

Pain management in the acute care setting: Update and debates

Pain management in the paediatric acute care setting is underutilised and can be improved. An awareness of the analgesic options available and their limitations is an important starting point. This article describes the evolving understanding of relevant pharmacogenomics and safety data of the various analgesic agents with a focus on agents available in Australia and New Zealand. It highlights the concerns with the use of codeine in children and discusses alternative oral opioids. Key features of oral, parenteral, inhaled and intranasal analgesic agents are discussed, as well as evidence supported use of sweet tasting solutions and non-pharmacological interventions. One of the biggest changes in acute care pain management has been the advent of intranasal fentanyl providing reliable potent analgesia without the need for intravenous access. The article will also address the issue of multimodal analgesia where a single agent is insufficient.

Missed Opportunities for Sedation and Pain Management at a Level III Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, India

BACKGROUND

Neonates in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) undergo a multitude of painful and stressful procedures during the first days of life. Stress from this pain can lead to neurodevelopmental problems that manifest in later childhood and should be prevented.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the number of painful procedures performed per day for each neonate, to verify documentation of painful procedures performed, and to, subsequently, note missed opportunities for providing pain relief to neonates.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study at a level III NICU located in a rural part of western India. A total of 69 neonates admitted for more than 24 h were included. Twenty-nine neonates were directly observed for a total of 24 h each, and another 40 neonatal records were retrospectively reviewed for the neonate's first 7 days of admission. All stressful and painful procedures performed on the neonate were recorded. Also recorded were any pharmaceutical pain relief agents or central nervous system depressants administered to the neonate before or at the time of the procedures. Average nurse-patient ratio was also calculated. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

A documentation deficit of 2.2% was observed. The average nurse-patient ratio was 1.53:1. A total of 13711 procedures were recorded, yielding 44.1 (38.1 stressful, 3.8 mildly painful, and 2.2 moderately painful) procedures per patient day. Common stressful procedures were position changing (2501) and temperature recording (2208). Common mildly and moderately painful procedures were heel prick (757) and endotracheal suctioning (526), respectively. Use of pharmacological agents coincided with 33.48% of the procedures. The choice of drug and time of administration were inappropriate, indicating that the pharmacological agents were intended not for pain relief but rather for a coexisting pathology or as sedation from ventilation with no analgesia.

CONCLUSION

Stressful procedures are common in the NICU; mildly and moderately painful procedures fairly common. Almost two-thirds of the times, no pharmaceutical pain relief methods were used, and when administered, the pharmaceutical agents were seldom intended for pain relief; this implies poor pain management practices and emphasizes the imperative need for educating NICU nurses, residents, fellows, and attendings.

Far From "Just a Poke": Common Painful Needle Procedures and the Development of Needle Fear

BACKGROUND

Vaccine injections are the most common painful needle procedure experienced throughout the lifespan. Many strategies are available to mitigate this pain; however, they are uncommonly utilized, leading to unnecessary pain and suffering. Some individuals develop a high level of fear and subsequent needle procedures are associated with significant distress.

OBJECTIVE

The present work is part of an update and expansion of a 2009 knowledge synthesis to include the management of vaccine-related pain across the lifespan and the treatment of individuals with high levels of needle fear. This article will provide a conceptual foundation for understanding: (a) painful procedures and their role in the development and maintenance of high levels of fear; (b) treatment strategies for preventing or reducing the experience of pain and the development of fear; and (c) interventions for mitigating high levels of fear once they are established.

RESULTS

First, the general definitions, lifespan development and functionality, needle procedure-related considerations, and assessment of the following constructs are provided: pain, fear, anxiety, phobia, distress, and vasovagal syncope. Second, the importance of unmitigated pain from needle procedures is highlighted from a developmental perspective. Third, the prevalence, course, etiology, and consequences of high levels of needle fear are described. Finally, the management of needle-related pain and fear are outlined to provide an introduction to the series of systematic reviews in this issue.

DISCUSSION

Through the body of work in this supplement, the authors aim to provide guidance in how to treat vaccination-related pain and its sequelae, including high levels of needle fear.