Pain in Intellectually Disabled Children: Towards Evidence-Based Pharmacotherapy?

Assessment of pain management adequacy among hospitalized pediatric patients: institutional-based cross-sectional study

Background

As the evidence showed, despite the magnitude of the effects that pain can have on a child, it is often inadequately assessed and treated. However, whether pain is adequately treated or not, evidence is lacking in the study setting.

Objectives

This study assessed pain management adequacy among hospitalized pediatric patients at the University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Ethiopia.

Methods

An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted among pediatric patients admitted to the University of Gondar Comprehensive and Specialized Hospital between June and August 2021. Eligible patients were enrolled in the study using consecutive sampling techniques. Data were collected using a structured interview-based questionnaire and a review of the patient's medical records that were prepared after reviewing earlier studies. Pain management adequacy was determined using the pain management index (PMI) score. Statistical Software for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22 was used for data entry and analysis. Descriptive statistics such as frequencies, percentages, and means with standard deviation were used to describe the respective variables. Logistic regression was used to assess predictor variables of pain management adequacy. A p-value <0.05 at a 95% CI was considered statistically significant.

Results

Of the 422 participants enrolled in the study, most (58.1%) were males, with a mean age of 3.9 ± 0.8 years. Pain medication was prescribed to 62.8% (95% CI: 57.3-68.2) of the participants. About 63.3% (95% CI: 58.8%-68%) received inadequate analgesics. The type of painkillers administered also did not match the severity of the pain. Pediatric patients less than 1 month and between 1 month and 1 year (AOR = 2.891, 95% CI: 1.274-12.899 and AOR = 2.657, 95% CI: 1.350-5.175), respectively, and patients with severe and moderate levels of pain (AOR = 3.448, 95% CI: 1.902-6.251 and AOR = 5.345, 95% CI: 1.956-9.828), respectively, were found to have inadequate pain medication compared with their counterparts.

Conclusion

This study revealed that pain was hardly managed based on its severity. Overall, two-thirds of pediatric patients received inadequate pain medication. This indicates majority of patients experienced pain did not manage appropriately.

Recommendations for analgesia and sedation in critically ill children admitted to intensive care unit

We aim to develop evidence-based recommendations for intensivists caring for children admitted to intensive care units and requiring analgesia and sedation. A panel of national paediatric intensivists expert in the field of analgesia and sedation and other specialists (a paediatrician, a neuropsychiatrist, a psychologist, a neurologist, a pharmacologist, an anaesthesiologist, two critical care nurses, a methodologist) started in 2018, a 2-year process. Three meetings and one electronic-based discussion were dedicated to the development of the recommendations (presentation of the project, selection of research questions, overview of text related to the research questions, discussion of recommendations). A telematic anonymous consultation was adopted to reach the final agreement on recommendations. A formal conflict-of-interest declaration was obtained from all the authors. Eight areas of direct interest and one additional topic were considered to identify the best available evidence and to develop the recommendations using the Evidence-to-Decision framework according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. For each recommendation, the level of evidence, the strength of the recommendation, the benefits, the harms and the risks, the benefit/harm balance, the intentional vagueness, the values judgement, the exclusions, the difference of the opinions, the knowledge gaps, and the research opportunities were reported. The panel produced 17 recommendations. Nine were evaluated as strong, 3 as moderate, and 5 as weak. Conclusion: a panel of national experts achieved consensus regarding recommendations for the best care in terms of analgesia and sedation in critically ill children.

Paracetamol and Ibuprofen in the Treatment of Fever and Acute Mild-Moderate Pain in Children: Italian Experts' Consensus Statements

Fever and pain are challenging symptoms in children and adolescents and are common reasons for consultations in primary care and hospital. Paracetamol and ibuprofen are currently the only recommended drugs for treating fever in Italy, but the therapeutic approaches are discrepant in the different settings. In Italy, paracetamol and ibuprofen are the most prescribed analgesics for acute mild–moderate pain in children; however, their use is often inappropriate in that fever is over-treated and pain is under-treated. An Italian board of experts analyzed the motivations for the misalignment between daily practice and guidelines of fever and acute mild–moderate pain management of the territory and hospitals. The expert opinion consensus process underscored the appropriate use of paracetamol and ibuprofen according to clinical scenarios, patients’ profiles, and the safety features of the drugs. Although patients’ profiles can indicate different benefits from paracetamol or ibuprofen, critical issues of fever and acute mild–moderate pain management persist in primary care and hospitals. These expert opinion consensus statements can be an across-the-board tool to harmonize the routine practice between the territory and hospitals, especially under special conditions (at-risk for dehydration, coagulation disorder patients, etc.). It can also promote educational activity about fever and acute mild–moderate pain management to enhance the milestones already achieved by Italian pediatricians.

[Challenges in pain assessment and management among individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities : German version]

INTRODUCTION

Intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) include conditions associated with physical, learning, language, behavioural, and/or intellectual impairment. Pain is a common and debilitating secondary condition compromising functional abilities and quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

This article addresses scientific and clinical challenges in pain assessment and management in individuals with severe IDD.

METHODS

This Clinical Update aligns with the 2019 IASP Global Year Against Pain in the Vulnerable and selectively reviews recurring issues as well as the best available evidence and practice.

RESULTS

The past decade of pain research has involved the development of standardized assessment tools appropriate for individuals with severe IDD; however, there is little empirical evidence that pain is being better assessed or managed clinically. There is limited evidence available to inform effective pain management practices; therefore, treatment approaches are largely empiric and highly variable. This is problematic because individuals with IDD are at risk of developing drug-related side effects, and treatment approaches effective for other populations may exacerbate pain in IDD populations. Scientifically, we are especially challenged by biases in self-reported and proxy-reported pain scores, identifying valid outcome measures for treatment trials, being able to adequately power studies due to small sample sizes, and our inability to easily explore the underlying pain mechanisms due to compromised ability to self-report.

CONCLUSION

Despite the critical challenges, new developments in research and knowledge translation activities in pain and IDD continue to emerge, and there are ongoing international collaborations.

Challenges in pain assessment and management among individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities

Pain is common for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities, and we need to accelerate the use of evidence-based approaches to assess and manage pain.

Introduction:

Intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) include conditions associated with physical, learning, language, behavioural, and/or intellectual impairment. Pain is a common and debilitating secondary condition compromising functional abilities and quality of life.

Objectives:

This article addresses scientific and clinical challenges in pain assessment and management in individuals with severe IDD.

Methods:

This Clinical Update aligns with the 2019 IASP Global Year Against Pain in the Vulnerable and selectively reviews recurring issues as well as the best available evidence and practice.

Results:

The past decade of pain research has involved the development of standardized assessment tools appropriate for individuals with severe IDD; however, there is little empirical evidence that pain is being better assessed or managed clinically. There is limited evidence available to inform effective pain management practices; therefore, treatment approaches are largely empiric and highly variable. This is problematic because individuals with IDD are at risk of developing drug-related side effects, and treatment approaches effective for other populations may exacerbate pain in IDD populations. Scientifically, we are especially challenged by biases in self-reported and proxy-reported pain scores, identifying valid outcome measures for treatment trials, being able to adequately power studies due to small sample sizes, and our inability to easily explore the underlying pain mechanisms due to compromised ability to self-report.

Conclusion:

Despite the critical challenges, new developments in research and knowledge translation activities in pain and IDD continue to emerge, and there are ongoing international collaborations.

Validation of yoga module for children with intellectual disabilities

BACKGROUND

Children with developmental disabilities generally experience more pain than the normal children due to chronic systemic conditions associated with their disability. Description of pain is generally difficult in children and more so in children with intellectual disabilities (IDs). Yoga has been regarded as a kind of physical activity as well as a pain management strategy. Previous studies have reported the beneficial role of yoga in enhancing physical and psychomotor abilities of IDs; however, a validated yoga module (YM) for IDs is unavailable. The present study is aimed at developing a validated YM for children with IDs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The content validity of YM for children with IDs was assessed by a panel of 22 experienced yoga experts. The YM for children with IDs was developed in the form of tailor-made yoga practices that were supported by classical texts and research evidence. A total of 32 practices were included in the YM, and each practice was discussed and rated as (i) not essential, (ii) useful but not essential, and (iii) essential. The content validitity ratiowas calculated using Lawshe's formula.

RESULTS

Data analysis showed that out of 32 YM practices, 31 indicated significant content validity (cutoff value: 0.42, as calculated by applying Lawshe's formula for the CVR).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggests that the YM for children with IDs is valid with good content validity. However, future randomized controlled trials must determine the feasibility and efficacy of the developed YM for children with IDs.

Clinical Analysis of Analgesics and Steroids Use for Extraction of Teeth in Patients with Intellectual Disability Under General Anesthesia

Background:

The extraction of lower wisdom teeth is often performed under general anesthesia in patients with intellectual disabilities. However, the choice of analgesics has not yet been investigated.

Objective:

To analyze the use of analgesics during general anesthesia for extraction including lower wisdom teeth in patients with intellectual disabilities.

Methods:

This research is a retrospective observational study. The study population was composed of all patients presenting for extraction of lower wisdom teeth under ambulatory general anesthesia in the clinic of Special Needs Dentistry in Okayama University Hospital from April 2011 to March 2016. The distribution of the combination of analgesics and the relationship between the use of analgesics and the type of extraction were investigated.

Results:

One hundred and twelve cases were enrolled in this study. Intravenous injections of flurbiprofen, acetaminophen and betamethasone were used in 96 (85.7%), 12 (10.7%) and 26 cases (23.2%), respectively. Flurbiprofen is a non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Acetaminophen is an old analgesic, but an injection of acetaminophen is new, which was released in 2013 in Japan. And betamethasone is not an analgesic, but a steroid. Betamethasone was used in combination with other analgesics, and was used at a higher dose in a case in which four wisdom teeth were extracted.

Conclusion:

Flurbiprofen was the main analgesic used for extraction of wisdom teeth under general anesthesia in patients with intellectual disabilities. Betamethasone was used to support flurbiprofen or acetaminophen for extractions of multiple wisdom teeth, with the aim of controlling swelling rather than relieving pain.