Paracetamol (acetaminophen) for prevention or treatment of pain in newborns

Pain Assessment and Management Practices via Education & Reinforcement (PAMPER): A Quality Improvement Initiative

OBJECTIVES

To establish neonatal pain management practices as an essential developmental supportive measure at a tertiary care unit.

METHODS

This quality improvement initiative was conducted as per Point-of-Care-Quality-Improvement Model over 6 mo, followed by 2 y of sustenance phase at a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) in northern India. Infants of birth weight ≤1800 g were included and assessed for pain. Pain Assessment and Management Practices via Education and Reinforcement (PAMPER) group was created by resident doctors and nursing staff. The Premature Infant Pain Profile score was used for the assessment of pain. Limiting factors were analyzed using a fishbone diagram and interventions were done in multiple Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles.

RESULTS

At the end of interventions, 100% of procedures were assessed for pain. The mean (standard deviation) documented pain score for the first seven days was reduced from 12.8 (0.3) in the baseline phase to 7 (2.5). These interventions helped to sustain the practice in >70% of infants in the next 2 y.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-cost interventions improved the pain assessment and management policy of authors' NICU with the establishment of a standard protocol. Audits and reinforcement at regular intervals helped in its long-term sustenance.

Accurate Neonatal Face Detection for Improved Pain Classification in the Challenging NICU Setting

There is a tendency for object detection systems using off-the-shelf algorithms to fail when deployed in complex scenes. The present work describes a case for detecting facial expression in post-surgical neonates (newborns) as a modality for predicting and classifying severe pain in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). Our initial testing showed that both an off-the-shelf face detector and a machine learning algorithm trained on adult faces failed to detect facial expression of neonates in the NICU. We improved accuracy in this complex scene by training a state-of-the-art "You-Only-Look-Once" (YOLO) face detection model using the USF-MNPAD-I dataset of neonate faces. At run-time our trained YOLO model showed a difference of 8.6% mean Average Precision (mAP) and 21.2% Area under the ROC Curve (AUC) for automatic classification of neonatal pain compared with manual pain scoring by NICU nurses. Given the challenges, time and effort associated with collecting ground truth from the faces of post-surgical neonates, here we share the weights from training our YOLO model with these facial expression data. These weights can facilitate the further development of accurate strategies for detecting facial expression, which can be used to predict the time to pain onset in combination with other sensory modalities (body movements, crying frequency, vital signs). Reliable predictions of time to pain onset in turn create a therapeutic window of time wherein NICU nurses and providers can implement safe and effective strategies to mitigate severe pain in this vulnerable patient population.

Comparative Efficacy of Breastfeeding or Feeding of Breast Milk on Blood Sampling Pain Relief in Full-Term Neonates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of breastfeeding or feeding of breast milk in reducing blood sampling pain in full-term neonates by comparing with other intervention measures. Methods: Related literature was searched from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Central). Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which reported the effect of breastfeeding or feeding of breast milk on blood sampling pain in full-term neonates, were eligible. The primary outcome was set as pain score on scales, and the secondary outcomes as physiological and behavioral indicators. The risk of bias in included studies was assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Data analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1. Main Results: A total of 17 RCTs were included. Breastfeeding showed a stronger effectiveness in reducing blood sampling pain, compared with nonintervention, placebo, mother's holding, breast milk odor, mother's heartbeat, music therapy, skin-to-skin, and Eutectic Mixture of Local Anesthetics ointment. However, the efficacy of glucose or sucrose (12.5%-30% concentration) seems better than breastfeeding. When compared with other interventions, feeding of breast milk yielded different results. Its effect was only stronger than placebo (sterile water or distilled water), massage, or nonintervention. Conclusions: Breastfeeding might be effective for alleviating blood sampling pain in full-term neonates. Its effect is second only to that of glucose/sucrose. The efficacy of feeding of breast milk in reducing blood sampling pain in full-term neonates might not be guaranteed.

Non-pharmacological interventions for the prevention of pain during endotracheal suctioning in ventilated neonates

BACKGROUND

Pain, when treated inadequately, puts preterm infants at a greater risk of developing clinical and behavioural sequelae because of their immature pain system. Preterm infants in need of intensive care are repeatedly and persistently exposed to noxious stimuli, and this happens during a critical window of their brain development with peak rates of brain growth, exuberant synaptogenesis and the developmental regulation of specific receptor populations. Nearly two-thirds of infants born at less than 29 weeks' gestation require mechanical ventilation for some duration during the newborn period. These neonates are endotracheally intubated and require repeated endotracheal suctioning. Endotracheal suctioning is identified as one of the most frequent and most painful procedures in premature infants, causing moderate to severe pain. Even with improved nursing performance and standard procedures based on neonatal needs, endotracheal suctioning remains associated with mild pain.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of non-pharmacological interventions for the prevention of pain during endotracheal suctioning in mechanically ventilated neonates. Non-pharmacological interventions were compared to no intervention, standard care or another non-pharmacological intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted searches in June 2023 in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and three trial registries. We searched the reference lists of related systematic reviews, and of studies selected for inclusion.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and cluster-RCTs that included term and preterm neonates who were mechanically ventilated via endotracheal tube or via tracheostomy tube and required endotracheal suctioning performed by doctors, nurses, physiotherapists or other healthcare professionals.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Our main outcome measures were validated composite pain scores (including a combination of behavioural, physiological and contextual indicators). Secondary outcomes included separate physiological and behavioural pain indicators. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. For continuous outcome measures, we used a fixed-effect model and reported mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For categorical outcomes, we reported the typical risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD) and 95% CIs. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 1 tool, and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight RCTs (nine reports), which enroled 386 infants, in our review. Five of the eight studies were included in a meta-analysis. All studies enrolled preterm neonates. Facilitated tucking versus standard care (four studies) Facilitated tucking probably reduces Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) score during endotracheal suctioning (MD -2.76, 95% CI 3.57 to 1.96; I² = 82%; 4 studies, 148 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). Facilitated tucking probably has little or no effect during endotracheal suctioning on: heart rate (MD -3.06 beats per minute (bpm), 95% CI -9.33 to 3.21; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 80 infants; low-certainty evidence); oxygen saturation (MD 0.87, 95% CI -1.33 to 3.08; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 80 infants; low-certainty evidence); or stress and defensive behaviours (SDB) (MD -1.20, 95% CI -3.47 to 1.07; 1 study, 20 infants; low-certainty evidence). Facilitated tucking may result in a slight increase in self-regulatory behaviours (SRB) during endotracheal suctioning (MD 0.90, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.60; 1 study, 20 infants; low-certainty evidence). No studies reported intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH). Familiar odour versus standard care (one study) Familiar odour during endotracheal suctioning probably has little or no effect on: PIPP score (MD -0.30, 95% CI -2.15 to 1.55; 1 study, 40 infants; low-certainty evidence); heart rate (MD -6.30 bpm, 95% CI -16.04 to 3.44; 1 study, 40 infants; low-certainty evidence); or oxygen saturation during endotracheal suctioning (MD -0.80, 95% CI -4.82 to 3.22; 1 study, 40 infants; low-certainty evidence). No studies reported SRB, SDB or IVH. White noise (one study) White noise during endotracheal suctioning probably has little or no effect on PIPP (MD -0.65, 95% CI -2.51 to 1.21; 1 study, 40 infants; low-certainty evidence); heart rate (MD -1.85 bpm, 95% CI -11.46 to 7.76; 1 study, 40 infants; low-certainty evidence); or oxygen saturation (MD 2.25, 95% CI -2.03 to 6.53; 1 study, 40 infants; low-certainty evidence). No studies reported SRB, SDB or IVH.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Facilitated tucking / four-handed care / gentle human touch probably reduces PIPP score. The evidence of a single study suggests that facilitated tucking / four-handed care / gentle human touch slightly increases self-regulatory and approach behaviours during endotracheal suctioning. Based on a single study, familiar odour and white noise have little or no effect on any of the outcomes compared to no intervention. The use of expressed breast milk or oral sucrose suggests that there is no discernible advantage of one method over the other for reducing pain during endotracheal suctioning. None of the studies reported on any of the prespecified secondary outcomes of adverse events.

Pharmacological interventions for the management of pain and discomfort during lumbar puncture in newborn infants

BACKGROUND

Lumbar puncture (LP) is a common invasive procedure, most frequently performed to diagnose infection. Physicians perform LP in newborn infants with the help of an assistant using a strict aseptic technique; it is important to monitor the infant during all the steps of the procedure. Without adequate analgesia, LP can cause considerable pain and discomfort. As newborns have increased sensitivity to pain, it is crucial to adequately manage the procedural pain of LP in this population.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms, including pain, discomfort, and success rate, of any pharmacological intervention during lumbar puncture in newborn infants, compared to placebo, no intervention, non-pharmacological interventions, or other pharmacological interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, and three trial registries in December 2022. We also screened the reference lists of included studies and related systematic reviews for studies not identified by the database searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing drugs used for pain management, sedation, or both, during LP. We considered the following drugs suitable for inclusion. • Topical anesthetics (e.g. eutectic mixture of local anesthetics [EMLA], lidocaine) • Opioids (e.g. morphine, fentanyl) • Alpha-2 agonists (e.g. clonidine, dexmedetomidine) • N-Methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists (e.g. ketamine) • Other analgesics (e.g. paracetamol) • Sedatives (e.g. benzodiazepines such as midazolam) DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. We used the fixed-effect model with risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data and mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) for continuous data, with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Our main outcomes were successful LP on first attempt, total number of LP attempts, episodes of bradycardia, pain assessed with validated scales, episodes of desaturation, number of episodes of apnea, and number of infants with one or more episodes of apnea. We used the GRADE approach to evaluate the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three studies (two RCTs and one quasi-RCT) that enrolled 206 newborns. One study included only term infants. All studies assessed topical treatment versus placebo or no intervention. The topical anesthetics were lidocaine 4%, lidocaine 1%, and EMLA. We identified no completed studies on opioids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, alpha-2 agonists, NMDA receptor antagonists, other analgesics, sedatives, or head-to-head comparisons (drug A versus drug B). Based on very low-certainty evidence from one quasi-RCT of 100 LPs in 76 infants, we are unsure if topical anesthetics (lidocaine), compared to no anesthesia, has an effect on the following outcomes. • Successful LP on first attempt (first-attempts success in 48% of LPs in the lidocaine group and 42% of LPs in the control group) • Number of attempts per LP (mean 1.9 attempts, [standard error of the mean 0.2] in the lidocaine group, and mean 2.1 attempts [standard error of the mean 2.1] in the control group) • Episodes of bradycardia (0% of LPs in the lidocaine group and 4% of LPs in the control group) • Episodes of desaturation (0% of LPs in the lidocaine group and 8% of LPs in the control group) • Occurrence of apnea (RR 3.24, 95% CI 0.14 to 77.79; risk difference [RD] 0.02, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.08). Topical anesthetics compared to placebo may reduce pain assessed with the Neonatal Facial Coding System (NFCS) score (SMD -1.00 standard deviation (SD), 95% CI -1.47 to -0.53; I² = 98%; 2 RCTs, 112 infants; low-certainty evidence). No studies in this comparison reported total number of episodes of apnea. We identified three ongoing studies, which will assess the effects of EMLA, lidocaine, and fentanyl. Three studies are awaiting classification.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of topical anesthetics (lidocaine) compared to no anesthesia on successful lumbar puncture on first attempt, the number of attempts per lumbar puncture, episodes of bradycardia, episodes of desaturation, and occurrence of apnea. Compared to placebo, topical anesthetics (lidocaine or EMLA) may reduce pain assessed with the NFCS score. One ongoing study will assess the effects of systemic treatment.

Pharmacological pain and sedation interventions for the prevention of intraventricular hemorrhage in preterm infants on assisted ventilation - an overview of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Germinal matrix hemorrhage and intraventricular hemorrhage (GMH-IVH) may contribute to neonatal morbidity and mortality and result in long-term neurodevelopmental sequelae. Appropriate pain and sedation management in ventilated preterm infants may decrease the risk of GMH-IVH; however, it might be associated with harms.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the evidence from systematic reviews regarding the effects and safety of pharmacological interventions related to pain and sedation management in order to prevent GMH-IVH in ventilated preterm infants.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library August 2022 for reviews on pharmacological interventions for pain and sedation management to prevent GMH-IVH in ventilated preterm infants (< 37 weeks' gestation). We included Cochrane Reviews assessing the following interventions administered within the first week of life: benzodiazepines, paracetamol, opioids, ibuprofen, anesthetics, barbiturates, and antiadrenergics. Primary outcomes were any GMH-IVH (aGMH-IVH), severe IVH (sIVH), all-cause neonatal death (ACND), and major neurodevelopmental disability (MND). We assessed the methodological quality of included reviews using the AMSTAR-2 tool. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven Cochrane Reviews and one Cochrane Review protocol. The reviews on clonidine and paracetamol did not include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) matching our inclusion criteria. We included 40 RCTs (3791 infants) from reviews on paracetamol for patent ductus arteriosus (3), midazolam (3), phenobarbital (9), opioids (20), and ibuprofen (5). The quality of the included reviews was high. The certainty of the evidence was moderate to very low, because of serious imprecision and study limitations. Germinal matrix hemorrhage-intraventricular hemorrhage (any grade) Compared to placebo or no intervention, the evidence is very uncertain about the effects of paracetamol on aGMH-IVH (risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 2.07; 2 RCTs, 82 infants; very low-certainty evidence); midazolam may result in little to no difference in the incidence of aGMH-IVH (RR 1.68, 95% CI 0.87 to 3.24; 3 RCTs, 122 infants; low-certainty evidence); the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of phenobarbital on aGMH-IVH (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.19; 9 RCTs, 732 infants; very low-certainty evidence); opioids may result in little to no difference in aGMH-IVH (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.12; 7 RCTs, 469 infants; low-certainty evidence); ibuprofen likely results in little to no difference in aGMH-IVH (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.21; 4 RCTs, 759 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). Compared to ibuprofen, the evidence is very uncertain about the effects of paracetamol on aGMH-IVH (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.31 to 4.34; 1 RCT, 30 infants; very low-certainty evidence). Compared to midazolam, morphine may result in a reduction in aGMH-IVH (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.87; 1 RCT, 46 infants; low-certainty evidence). Compared to diamorphine, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of morphine on aGMH-IVH (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.07; 1 RCT, 88 infants; very low-certainty evidence). Severe intraventricular hemorrhage (grade 3 to 4) Compared to placebo or no intervention, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of paracetamol on sIVH (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.43 to 7.49; 2 RCTs, 82 infants; very low-certainty evidence) and of phenobarbital (grade 3 to 4) (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.25; 9 RCTs, 732 infants; very low-certainty evidence); opioids may result in little to no difference in sIVH (grade 3 to 4) (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.34; 6 RCTs, 1299 infants; low-certainty evidence); ibuprofen may result in little to no difference in sIVH (grade 3 to 4) (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.26; 4 RCTs, 747 infants; low-certainty evidence). No studies on midazolam reported this outcome. Compared to ibuprofen, the evidence is very uncertain about the effects of paracetamol on sIVH (RR 2.65, 95% CI 0.12 to 60.21; 1 RCT, 30 infants; very low-certainty evidence). Compared to midazolam, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of morphine on sIVH (grade 3 to 4) (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.43; 1 RCT, 46 infants; very low-certainty evidence). Compared to fentanyl, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of morphine on sIVH (grade 3 to 4) (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.95; 1 RCT, 163 infants; very low-certainty evidence). All-cause neonatal death Compared to placebo or no intervention, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of phenobarbital on ACND (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.72; 3 RCTs, 203 infants; very low-certainty evidence); opioids likely result in little to no difference in ACND (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.55; 5 RCTs, 1189 infants; moderate-certainty evidence); the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ibuprofen on ACND (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.38 to 2.64; 2 RCTs, 112 infants; very low-certainty evidence). Compared to midazolam, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of morphine on ACND (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.16; 1 RCT, 46 infants; very low-certainty evidence). Compared to diamorphine, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of morphine on ACND (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.43 to 3.19; 1 RCT, 88 infants; very low-certainty evidence). Major neurodevelopmental disability Compared to placebo, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on MND at 18 to 24 months (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.39 to 10.29; 1 RCT, 78 infants; very low-certainty evidence) and at five to six years (RR 1.6, 95% CI 0.56 to 4.56; 1 RCT, 95 infants; very low-certainty evidence). No studies on other drugs reported this outcome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

None of the reported studies had an impact on aGMH-IVH, sIVH, ACND, or MND. The certainty of the evidence ranged from moderate to very low. Large RCTs of rigorous methodology are needed to achieve an optimal information size to assess the effects of pharmacological interventions for pain and sedation management for the prevention of GMH-IVH and mortality in preterm infants. Studies might compare interventions against either placebo or other drugs. Reporting of the outcome data should include the assessment of GMH-IVH and long-term neurodevelopment.

Opioids for procedural pain in neonates

BACKGROUND

Neonates might be exposed to numerous painful procedures due to diagnostic reasons, therapeutic interventions, or surgical procedures. Options for pain management include opioids, non-pharmacological interventions, and other drugs. Morphine, fentanyl, and remifentanil are the opioids most often used in neonates. However, negative impact of opioids on the structure and function of the developing brain has been reported.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of opioids in term or preterm neonates exposed to procedural pain, compared to placebo or no drug, non-pharmacological intervention, other analgesics or sedatives, other opioids, or the same opioid administered by a different route.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was December 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials conducted in preterm and term infants of a postmenstrual age (PMA) up to 46 weeks and 0 days exposed to procedural pain where opioids were compared to 1) placebo or no drug; 2) non-pharmacological intervention; 3) other analgesics or sedatives; 4) other opioids; or 5) the same opioid administered by a different route.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were pain assessed with validated methods and any harms. We used a fixed-effect model with risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, and their confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 independent studies (enrolling 823 newborn infants): seven studies compared opioids to no treatment or placebo (the main comparison in this review), two studies to oral sweet solution or non-pharmacological intervention, and five studies (of which two were part of the same study) to other analgesics and sedatives. All studies were performed in a hospital setting. Opioids compared to placebo or no drug Compared to placebo, opioids probably reduce pain score assessed with the Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP)/PIPP-Revised (PIPP-R) scale during the procedure (MD -2.58, 95% CI -3.12 to -2.03; 199 participants, 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence); may reduce Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS) during the procedure (MD -1.97, 95% CI -2.46 to -1.48; 102 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence); and may result in little to no difference in pain score assessed with the Douleur Aiguë du Nouveau-né (DAN) scale one to two hours after the procedure (MD -0.20, 95% CI -2.21 to 1.81; 42 participants, 1 study; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain score assessed with the PIPP/PIPP-R scale up to 30 minutes after the procedure (MD 0.14, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.45; 123 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) or one to two hours after the procedure (MD -0.83, 95% CI -2.42 to 0.75; 54 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of bradycardia (RR 3.19, 95% CI 0.14 to 72.69; 172 participants, 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence). Opioids may result in an increase in episodes of apnea compared to placebo (RR 3.15, 95% CI 1.08 to 9.16; 199 participants, 3 studies; low-certainty evidence): with one study reporting a concerning increase in severe apnea (RR 7.44, 95% CI 0.42 to 132.95; 31 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of hypotension (RR not estimable, risk difference 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.06; 88 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported parent satisfaction with care provided in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Opioids compared to non-pharmacological intervention The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain score assessed with the Crying Requires oxygen Increased vital signs Expression Sleep (CRIES) scale during the procedure when compared to facilitated tucking (MD -4.62, 95% CI -6.38 to -2.86; 100 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence) or sensorial stimulation (MD 0.32, 95% CI -1.13 to 1.77; 100 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). The other main outcomes were not reported. Opioids compared to other analgesics or sedatives The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain score assessed with the PIPP/PIPP-R during the procedure (MD -0.29, 95% CI -1.58 to 1.01; 124 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence); up to 30 minutes after the procedure (MD -1.10, 95% CI -2.82 to 0.62; 12 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence); and one to two hours after the procedure (MD -0.17, 95% CI -2.22 to 1.88; 12 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported any harms. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of apnea during (RR 3.27, 95% CI 0.85 to 12.58; 124 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) and after the procedure (RR 2.71, 95% CI 0.11 to 64.96; 124 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) and on hypotension (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.32 to 5.59; 204 participants, 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence). The other main outcomes were not reported. We identified no studies comparing different opioids (e.g. morphine versus fentanyl) or different routes for administration of the same opioid (e.g. morphine enterally versus morphine intravenously).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to placebo, opioids probably reduce pain score assessed with PIPP/PIPP-R scale during the procedure; may reduce NIPS during the procedure; and may result in little to no difference in DAN one to two hours after the procedure. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain assessed with other pain scores or at different time points. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of bradycardia, hypotension or severe apnea. Opioids may result in an increase in episodes of apnea. No studies reported parent satisfaction with care provided in the NICU. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on any outcome when compared to non-pharmacological interventions or to other analgesics. We identified no studies comparing opioids to other opioids or comparing different routes of administration of the same opioid.

Opioids for procedural pain in neonates

BACKGROUND

Neonates might be exposed to numerous painful procedures due to diagnostic reasons, therapeutic interventions, or surgical procedures. Options for pain management include opioids, non-pharmacological interventions, and other drugs. Morphine, fentanyl, and remifentanil are the opioids most often used in neonates. However, negative impact of opioids on the structure and function of the developing brain has been reported.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of opioids in term or preterm neonates exposed to procedural pain, compared to placebo or no drug, non-pharmacological intervention, other analgesics or sedatives, other opioids, or the same opioid administered by a different route.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was December 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials conducted in preterm and term infants of a postmenstrual age (PMA) up to 46 weeks and 0 days exposed to procedural pain where opioids were compared to 1) placebo or no drug; 2) non-pharmacological intervention; 3) other analgesics or sedatives; 4) other opioids; or 5) the same opioid administered by a different route.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were pain assessed with validated methods and any harms. We used a fixed-effect model with risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, and their confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 independent studies (enrolling 823 newborn infants): seven studies compared opioids to no treatment or placebo (the main comparison in this review), two studies to oral sweet solution or non-pharmacological intervention, and five studies (of which two were part of the same study) to other analgesics and sedatives. All studies were performed in a hospital setting. Opioids compared to placebo or no drug Compared to placebo, opioids probably reduce pain score assessed with the Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP)/PIPP-Revised (PIPP-R) scale during the procedure (MD -2.58, 95% CI -3.12 to -2.03; 199 participants, 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence); may reduce Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS) during the procedure (MD -1.97, 95% CI -2.46 to -1.48; 102 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence); and may result in little to no difference in pain score assessed with the Douleur Aiguë du Nouveau-né (DAN) scale one to two hours after the procedure (MD -0.20, 95% CI -2.21 to 1.81; 42 participants, 1 study; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain score assessed with the PIPP/PIPP-R scale up to 30 minutes after the procedure (MD 0.14, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.45; 123 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) or one to two hours after the procedure (MD -0.83, 95% CI -2.42 to 0.75; 54 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported any harms. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of bradycardia (RR 3.19, 95% CI 0.14 to 72.69; 172 participants, 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence). Opioids may result in an increase in episodes of apnea compared to placebo (RR 3.15, 95% CI 1.08 to 9.16; 199 participants, 3 studies; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of hypotension (RR not estimable, risk difference 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.06; 88 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported parent satisfaction with care provided in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Opioids compared to non-pharmacological intervention The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain score assessed with the Crying Requires oxygen Increased vital signs Expression Sleep (CRIES) scale during the procedure when compared to facilitated tucking (MD -4.62, 95% CI -6.38 to -2.86; 100 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence) or sensorial stimulation (MD 0.32, 95% CI -1.13 to 1.77; 100 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). The other main outcomes were not reported. Opioids compared to other analgesics or sedatives The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain score assessed with the PIPP/PIPP-R during the procedure (MD -0.29, 95% CI -1.58 to 1.01; 124 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence); up to 30 minutes after the procedure (MD -1.10, 95% CI -2.82 to 0.62; 12 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence); and one to two hours after the procedure (MD -0.17, 95% CI -2.22 to 1.88; 12 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported any harms. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of apnea during (RR 3.27, 95% CI 0.85 to 12.58; 124 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) and after the procedure (RR 2.71, 95% CI 0.11 to 64.96; 124 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) and on hypotension (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.32 to 5.59; 204 participants, 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence). The other main outcomes were not reported. We identified no studies comparing different opioids (e.g. morphine versus fentanyl) or different routes for administration of the same opioid (e.g. morphine enterally versus morphine intravenously).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to placebo, opioids probably reduce pain score assessed with PIPP/PIPP-R scale during the procedure; may reduce NIPS during the procedure; and may result in little to no difference in DAN one to two hours after the procedure. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain assessed with other pain scores or at different time points. No studies reported if any harms occurred. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of bradycardia or hypotension. Opioids may result in an increase in episodes of apnea. No studies reported parent satisfaction with care provided in the NICU. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on any outcome when compared to non-pharmacological interventions or to other analgesics. We identified no studies comparing opioids to other opioids or comparing different routes of administration of the same opioid.

Systemic opioids versus other analgesics and sedatives for postoperative pain in neonates

BACKGROUND

Neonates may undergo surgery because of malformations such as diaphragmatic hernia, gastroschisis, congenital heart disease, and hypertrophic pyloric stenosis, or complications of prematurity, such as necrotizing enterocolitis, spontaneous intestinal perforation, and retinopathy of prematurity that require surgical treatment. Options for treatment of postoperative pain include opioids, non-pharmacological interventions, and other drugs. Morphine, fentanyl, and remifentanil are the opioids most often used in neonates. However, negative impact of opioids on the structure and function of the developing brain has been reported. The assessment of the effects of opioids is of utmost importance, especially for neonates in substantial pain during the postoperative period.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of systemic opioid analgesics in neonates who underwent surgery on all-cause mortality, pain, and significant neurodevelopmental disability compared to no intervention, placebo, non-pharmacological interventions, different types of opioids, or other drugs.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE via PubMed and CINAHL in May 2021. We searched the WHO ICTRP, clinicaltrials.gov, and ICTRP trial registries. We searched conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for RCTs and quasi-RCTs.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in preterm and term infants of a postmenstrual age up to 46 weeks and 0 days with postoperative pain where systemic opioids were compared to 1) placebo or no intervention; 2) non-pharmacological interventions; 3) different types of opioids; or 4) other drugs.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were pain assessed with validated methods, all-cause mortality during initial hospitalization, major neurodevelopmental disability, and cognitive and educational outcomes in children more than five years old. We used the fixed-effect model with risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD) for dichotomous data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four RCTs enrolling 331 infants in four countries across different continents. Most studies considered patients undergoing large or medium surgical procedures (including major thoracic or abdominal surgery), who potentially required pain control through opioid administration after surgery. The randomized trials did not consider patients undergoing minor surgery (including inguinal hernia repair) and those individuals exposed to opioids before the beginning of the trial. Two RCTs compared opioids with placebo; one fentanyl with tramadol; and one morphine with paracetamol. No meta-analyses could be performed because the included RCTs reported no more than three outcomes within the prespecified comparisons. Certainty of the evidence was very low for all outcomes due to imprecision of the estimates (downgrade by two levels) and study limitations (downgrade by one level).  Comparison 1: opioids versus no treatment or placebo Two trials were included in this comparison, comparing either tramadol or tapentadol with placebo. No data were reported on the following critical outcomes: pain; major neurodevelopmental disability; or cognitive and educational outcomes in children more than five years old. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of tramadol compared with placebo on all-cause mortality during initial hospitalization (RR 0.32, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.01 to 7.70; RD -0.03, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.05, 71 participants, 1 study; I² = not applicable). No data were reported on: retinopathy of prematurity; or intraventricular hemorrhage.  Comparison 2: opioids versus non-pharmacological interventions No trials were included in this comparison. Comparison 3: head-to-head comparisons of different opioids One trial comparing fentanyl with tramadol was included in this comparison. No data were reported on the following critical outcomes: pain; major neurodevelopmental disability; or cognitive and educational outcomes in children more than five years old. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of fentanyl compared with tramadol on all-cause mortality during initial hospitalization (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.64; RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.13, 171 participants, 1 study; I² = not applicable). No data were reported on: retinopathy of prematurity; or intraventricular hemorrhage.  Comparison 4: opioids versus other analgesics and sedatives One trial comparing morphine with paracetamol was included in this comparison. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of morphine compared with paracetamol on COMFORT pain scores (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.85 to 1.05; 71 participants, 1 study; I² = not applicable).  No data were reported on the other critical outcomes, i.e. major neurodevelopmental disability; cognitive and educational outcomes in children more than five years old, all-cause mortality during initial hospitalization; retinopathy of prematurity; or intraventricular hemorrhage.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Limited evidence is available on opioid administration for postoperative pain in newborn infants compared to either placebo, other opioids, or paracetamol. We are uncertain whether tramadol reduces mortality compared to placebo; none of the studies reported pain scores, major neurodevelopmental disability, cognitive and educational outcomes in children older than five years old, retinopathy of prematurity, or intraventricular hemorrhage. We are uncertain whether fentanyl reduces mortality compared to tramadol; none of the studies reported pain scores, major neurodevelopmental disability, cognitive and educational outcomes in children older than five years old, retinopathy of prematurity, or intraventricular hemorrhage. We are uncertain whether morphine reduces pain compared to paracetamol; none of the studies reported major neurodevelopmental disability, cognitive and educational outcomes in children more than five years old, all-cause mortality during initial hospitalization, retinopathy of prematurity, or intraventricular hemorrhage. We identified no studies comparing opioids versus non-pharmacological interventions.

[Evidence-based guideline for neonatal pain management in China (2023)]

Pain disrupts neonatal vital signs and internal environment homeostasis and affects the recovery process, and recurrent pain stimulation is one of the important risk factors for neurodevelopmental disorders and some chronic diseases. In order to standardize pain management practice in neonatal wards in China and effectively prevent and reduce the adverse effects of pain on the physical and mental development of neonates, National Clinical Research Center for Child Health and Diseases (Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University) convened a multidisciplinary panel to formulate the evidence-based guideline for neonatal pain management in China (2023 edition) following the principles and methods for the guideline development issued by the World Health Organization. Based on the best evidence and expert consensus, this guideline gives 26 recommendations for nine clinical issues, i.e., the classification and definition of neonatal pain, common sources of pain, pain assessment principles, pain assessment methods, analgesic principle, non-pharmaceutical analgesic methods, pharmaceutical analgesic methods, parental participation in pain management, and recording methods for pain management, so as to provide medical staff with guidance and a decision-making basis for neonatal pain assessment and analgesia management.

Pharmacological interventions for the management of pain and discomfort during lumbar puncture in newborn infants

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To assess the benefits and harms, including pain, discomfort, and success rate, of any pharmacological intervention during lumbar puncture in newborn infants, compared to placebo, no intervention, non‐pharmacological interventions, or other pharmacological interventions.

Intravenous acetaminophen for postoperative pain control after open abdominal and thoracic surgery in pediatric patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Pediatric opioid exposure increases short- and long-term adverse events (AE). The addition of intravenous acetaminophen (IVA) to pediatric pain regimes to may reduce opioids but is not well studied postoperatively. Our objective was to quantify the impact of IVA on postoperative pain, opioid use, and AEs in pediatric patients after major abdominal and thoracic surgery. Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched systematically for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IVA to other modalities. Five RCTs enrolling 443 patients with an average age of 2.12 years (± 2.81) were included. Trials comparing IVA with opioids to opioids alone were meta-analyzed. Low to very low-quality evidence demonstrated equivalent pain scores between the groups (-0.23, 95% CI -0.88 to 0.40, p 0.47) and a reduction in opioid consumption (-1.95 morphine equivalents/kg/48 h, 95% CI -3.95 to 0.05, p 0.06) and minor AEs (relative risk 0.39, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.43, p 0.15). We conclude that the addition of IVA to opioid-based regimes in pediatric patients may reduce opioid use and minor AEs without increasing postoperative pain. Given the certainty of evidence, further research featuring patient-important outcomes and prolonged follow-up is necessary to confirm these findings.

An assessment of dexmedetomidine as an opioid-sparing agent after neonatal open thoracic and abdominal operations

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine as an opioid-sparing agent in infants following open thoracic or abdominal operations.

METHODS

Retrospective review of postoperative neonates who received IV acetaminophen with or without dexmedetomidine. The primary outcome was opioid dosage within the first ten postoperative days. Secondary outcomes included times to extubation, full feedings and discharge.

RESULTS

112 infants met inclusion criteria. Those managed with dexmedetomidine received 1.8-4.3 times more opioid on postoperative days 1-3, had longer times to extubation and trended towards longer lengths of hospital stay than infants who were not. Opioid was dosed >0.2 ME/kg on only 23% of days when the acetaminophen dose was >40 mg/kg/day and 10% of days when the acetaminophen dose was >45 mg/kg.

CONCLUSION

Dexmedetomidine may not be opioid sparing after major operations in neonates and its use delays recovery. IV acetaminophen dosed at 40 mg/kg/day or greater may yield the most substantial opioid-sparing effect.

Paracetamol (Acetaminophen) and the Developing Brain

Paracetamol is commonly used to treat fever and pain in pregnant women, but there are growing concerns that this may cause attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder in the offspring. A growing number of epidemiological studies suggests that relative risks for these disorders increase by an average of about 25% following intrauterine paracetamol exposure. The data analyzed point to a dose-effect relationship but cannot fully account for unmeasured confounders, notably indication and genetic transmission. Only few experimental investigations have addressed this issue. Altered behavior has been demonstrated in offspring of paracetamol-gavaged pregnant rats, and paracetamol given at or prior to day 10 of life to newborn mice resulted in altered locomotor activity in response to a novel home environment in adulthood and blunted the analgesic effect of paracetamol given to adult animals. The molecular mechanisms that might mediate these effects are unknown. Paracetamol has diverse pharmacologic actions. It reduces prostaglandin formation via competitive inhibition of the peroxidase moiety of prostaglandin H2 synthase, while its metabolite N-arachidonoyl-phenolamine activates transient vanilloid-subtype 1 receptors and interferes with cannabinoid receptor signaling. The metabolite N-acetyl-p-benzo-quinone-imine, which is pivotal for liver damage after overdosing, exerts oxidative stress and depletes glutathione in the brain already at dosages below the hepatic toxicity threshold. Given the widespread use of paracetamol during pregnancy and the lack of safe alternatives, its impact on the developing brain deserves further investigation.

Quantifying noxious-evoked baseline sensitivity in neonates to optimise analgesic trials

Despite the high burden of pain experienced by hospitalised neonates, there are few analgesics with proven efficacy. Testing analgesics in neonates is experimentally and ethically challenging and minimising the number of neonates required to demonstrate efficacy is essential. EEG (electroencephalography)-derived measures of noxious-evoked brain activity can be used to assess analgesic efficacy; however, as variability exists in neonate's responses to painful procedures, large sample sizes are often required. Here, we present an experimental paradigm to account for individual differences in noxious-evoked baseline sensitivity which can be used to improve the design of analgesic trials in neonates. The paradigm is developed and tested across four observational studies using clinical, experimental, and simulated data (92 neonates). We provide evidence of the efficacy of gentle brushing and paracetamol, substantiating the need for randomised controlled trials of these interventions. This work provides an important step towards safe, cost-effective clinical trials of analgesics in neonates.

Sustained release buprenorphine effectively attenuates postoperative hypersensitivity in an incisional pain model in neonatal rats (Rattus norvegicus)

Despite the need for safe and effective postoperative analgesia in neonates, research regarding pain management in neonatal rodents is relatively limited. Here, we investigate whether sustained release buprenorphine (Bup SR) effectively attenuates thermal hypersensitivity in a neonatal rat model of incisional pain. Male and female postnatal day 3 Sprague Dawley rat pups (n = 34) were randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups: 1) saline (control), 0.1 mL, once subcutaneously (SC); 2) buprenorphine HCl (Bup HCl), 0.05 mg/kg, once SC; 3) low dose Bup SR (low-SR), 0.5 mg/kg, once SC; 4) high dose Bup SR (high-SR), 1 mg/kg, once SC. Pups were anesthetized with sevoflurane and a 0.5-cm long skin incision was made over the left lateral thigh. The underlying muscle was dissected and closed using surgical glue. Thermal hypersensitivity testing was performed at 24 h prior to surgery and subsequently at 1, 4, 8, 24, and 48 h post-surgery using an infrared diode laser. Thermal hypersensitivity was attenuated at 1 h post-surgery in the Bup HCl group, while it was attenuated through the entire postoperative period in both low-SR and high-SR groups. This data suggests that a single dose of low-SR (0.5 mg/kg) or high-SR (1 mg/kg) effectively attenuates thermal hypersensitivity for at least 8 h in neonatal rat pups.

Changes in Physicians' Perceptions and Practices on Neonatal Pain Management Over the Past 20 Years. A Survey Conducted at Two Time-Points

Intense research for more than three decades expelled the view that neonates do not experience pain. The aim of this survey was to investigate whether the Greek physicians involved in neonatal intensive care have changed their perceptions regarding neonatal pain, adapting their management practices to the knowledge that have emerged in the past 20-years. This study is a survey conducted at two time-points, 20 years apart. Anonymous questionnaires were distributed to 117 and 145 physicians working in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) all over Greece in years 2000 and 2019, respectively. The response rate was 90.6 and 80.7% in 2000 and 2019, respectively. All respondents, at both time-points, believed that neonates experience pain, which has serious acute and long-term consequences, while the vast majority considered analgesia-sedation (A-S) during painful interventions as obligatory. Utilization of NICU protocols and pain assessment tools remained low although increased significantly between 2000 and 2019. The use of systemic A-S postoperatively was high at both time-points, while its implementation in infants subjected to prolonged pain, specifically mechanical ventilation, increased significantly by 2019. Systemic or local analgesia for acute procedural pain was used by lower proportions of physicians in 2019, except for the tracheal intubation. In contrast, the use of sweet solutions and non-pharmacological measures prior to or during bedside procedures significantly increased over time. Opioid administration significantly increased, while a shift from morphine to fentanyl was observed. International literature and perinatal-neonatal congresses were stated as the main sources of updating physicians' knowledge and improving management practice on neonatal pain prevention and treatment. In conclusion, Greek NICU-physicians' perceptions that neonates can experience pain with potentially serious acute and long-term consequences remained strong over the past 20 years. Although physicians' practices on neonatal pain management improved, they are still suboptimal, while significant differences exist among centers. Continuing education, globally accepted management protocols, and readily applied pain assessment tools would further improve the management of procedural pain and stress in neonates.

[Expert consensus on neonatal pain assessment and analgesia management (2020 edition)]

Compared with adults, neonates tend to have stronger and more persistent biological perception of pain. They may have the memory for pain and the negative effects caused by pain may exist for a long time. Therefore, standardized pain management can reduce or prevent the adverse effect of pain on body and mind and promote the rehabilitation process. In order to further deepen the understanding of pain management and standardize the analgesic measures for neonates, the Neonatologist Branch of Chinese Medical Association and Editorial Board of Chinese Journal of Contemporary Pediatrics have developed an expert consensus based on the clinical evidence in China and overseas and with reference to clinical experience from the following aspects: evaluation of neonatal pain and methods and techniques of pain management. It is recommended to adopt a step-by-step analgesic management for neonates. For mild pain stimulation, it is effective to relieve the pain by gentle touch and non-nutritive sucking combined with sucrose feeding. For moderate pain, selection of appropriate trocar needle and skilled puncture are important to reduce the pain, and in addition, the application of local anesthetics at the site of puncture also has a good effect. For severe pain, intravenous sedative drugs are often required, but no consistent evidence has been obtained so far.

[Expert consensus on neonatal pain assessment and analgesia management (2020 edition)]

Compared with adults, neonates tend to have stronger and more persistent biological perception of pain. They may have the memory for pain and the negative effects caused by pain may exist for a long time. Therefore, standardized pain management can reduce or prevent the adverse effect of pain on body and mind and promote the rehabilitation process. In order to further deepen the understanding of pain management and standardize the analgesic measures for neonates, the Neonatologist Branch of Chinese Medical Association and Editorial Board of Chinese Journal of Contemporary Pediatrics have developed an expert consensus based on the clinical evidence in China and overseas and with reference to clinical experience from the following aspects: evaluation of neonatal pain and methods and techniques of pain management. It is recommended to adopt a step-by-step analgesic management for neonates. For mild pain stimulation, it is effective to relieve the pain by gentle touch and non-nutritive sucking combined with sucrose feeding. For moderate pain, selection of appropriate trocar needle and skilled puncture are important to reduce the pain, and in addition, the application of local anesthetics at the site of puncture also has a good effect. For severe pain, intravenous sedative drugs are often required, but no consistent evidence has been obtained so far.