The effect of gentle human touch on pain, comfort and physiological parameters in preterm infants during heel lancing

Effects of White Noise and Therapeutic Touch on Pain and Comfort in Newborns during Heel Lance: A Randomized Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Nonpharmacological methods such as white noise and therapeutic touch can be used in pain management in neonates.

PURPOSE

This randomized controlled study evaluated the effects of white noise and therapeutic touch during heel lance procedures on pain, comfort levels, and physiological parameters in healthy neonates.

METHODS

This parallel, randomized controlled study was conducted in the Obstetrics and Gynecology Service of a regional hospital. The sample comprised 160 neonates with gestational ages of >35 weeks randomly assigned to 4 groups (white noise [WN], therapeutic touch [TT], white noise + therapeutic touch [WT], and control [CG] group). Pain and comfort levels were evaluated according to the Neonatal Infant Pain Scale, and the COMFORTneo Scale. The primary outcomes were pain and comfort levels, and the secondary outcomes were heart rate and SpO2 levels. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the scale scores among groups.

RESULTS

There were significant differences among groups in terms of Neonatal Infant Pain Scale and COMFORTneo scores (P < .05). The pain scores for the white noise, therapeutic touch, and white noise + therapeutic touch groups were 4.2 ± 2.0, 5.2 ± 1.6, and 3.3 ± 1.7, respectively. There was a significant difference in average heart rate during the heel lance procedure among the groups (P < .05). Pain scores of the intervention groups were lower compared to the control group.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE AND RESEARCH

The combination of white noise and therapeutic touch was more effective in reducing pain and increasing comfort levels. Nurses could reduce procedural pain by applying these pain relief methods.

The effect of the Yakson and Gentle Human Touch methods applied to preterm infants during endotracheal aspiration on pain, comfort, and physiological parameters

BACKGROUND

Preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit are exposed to various painful procedures; thus, different non-pharmacological pain control techniques are used to alleviate pain.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to determine the effect of Yakson and Gentle Human Touch (GHT) methods during endotracheal suctioning on pain, comfort, and physiological parameters response in preterm infants.

DESIGN

A randomised controlled crossover trial.

SETTING

This study was conducted in the neonatal intensive care unit between July 2022 and June 2023.

METHODS

Thirty infants were included in this study based on inclusion criteria. The samples randomly received a sequence of suctioning with Yakson and GHT and routine care. Neonatal Pain Agitation and Sedation Scale (N-PASS) and COMFORTneo were used to collect the data.

RESULTS

The pain and comfort scores of preterm infants who received GHT and Yakson touch during and after endotracheal suctioning were statistically significantly lower than the infants in the routine care (p < 0.001). It was determined that the difference was in favour of the Yakson group (p < 0.001). The infants who received GHT and Yakson application had lower heart rates and higher oxygen saturation levels after the application compared to the control group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The application of Yakson and GHT during endotracheal aspiration in preterm infants has been found to be effective in pain and comfort management, as well as in the regulation of physiological parameters.

Effect of non-pharmacological interventions on pain in preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of different non-pharmacological interventions for pain management in preterm infants and provide high-quality clinical evidence.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of various non-pharmacological interventions for pain management in preterm infants were searched from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from 2000 to the present (updated March 2023). The primary outcome was pain score reported as standardized mean difference (SMD). The secondary outcomes were oxygen saturation and heart rate reported as the same form.

RESULTS

Thirty five RCTs of 2134 preterm infants were included in the meta-analysis, involving 6 interventions: olfactory stimulation, combined oral sucrose and non-nutritive sucking (OS + NNS), facilitated tucking, auditory intervention, tactile relief, and mixed intervention. Based on moderate-quality evidence, OS + NNS (OR: 3.92, 95% CI: 1.72, 6.15, SUCRA score: 0.73), facilitated tucking (OR: 2.51, 95% CI: 1.15, 3.90, SUCRA score: 0.29), auditory intervention (OR: 2.48, 95% CI: 0.91, 4.10, SUCRA score: 0.27), olfactory stimulation (OR: 1.80, 95% CI: 0.51, 3.14, SUCRA score: 0.25), and mixed intervention (OR: 2.26, 95% CI: 0.10, 4.38, SUCRA score: 0.14) were all superior to the control group for pain relief. For oxygen saturation, facilitated tucking (OR: 1.94, 95% CI: 0.66, 3.35, SUCRA score: 0.64) and auditory intervention (OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.22, 2.04, SUCRA score: 0.36) were superior to the control. For heart rate, none of the comparisons between the various interventions were statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that there are notable variations in the effectiveness of different non-pharmacological interventions in terms of pain scores and oxygen saturation. However, there was no evidence of any improvement in heart rate.

Non-pharmacological management of infant and young child procedural pain

BACKGROUND

Despite evidence of the long-term implications of unrelieved pain during infancy, it is evident that infant pain is still under-managed and unmanaged. Inadequately managed pain in infancy, a period of exponential development, can have implications across the lifespan. Therefore, a comprehensive and systematic review of pain management strategies is integral to appropriate infant pain management. This is an update of a previously published review update in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2015, Issue 12) of the same title.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and adverse events of non-pharmacological interventions for infant and child (aged up to three years) acute pain, excluding kangaroo care, sucrose, breastfeeding/breast milk, and music.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE-Ovid platform, EMBASE-OVID platform, PsycINFO-OVID platform, CINAHL-EBSCO platform and trial registration websites (ClinicalTrials.gov; International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) (March 2015 to October 2020). An update search was completed in July 2022, but studies identified at this point were added to 'Awaiting classification' for a future update.  We also searched reference lists and contacted researchers via electronic list-serves.  We incorporated 76 new studies into the review.  SELECTION CRITERIA: Participants included infants from birth to three years in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or cross-over RCTs that had a no-treatment control comparison. Studies were eligible for inclusion in the analysis if they compared a non-pharmacological pain management strategy to a no-treatment control group (15 different strategies). In addition, we also analysed studies when the unique effect of adding a non-pharmacological pain management strategy onto another pain management strategy could be assessed (i.e. additive effects on a sweet solution, non-nutritive sucking, or swaddling) (three strategies). The eligible control groups for these additive studies were sweet solution only, non-nutritive sucking only, or swaddling only, respectively. Finally, we qualitatively described six interventions that met the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the review, but not in the analysis.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The outcomes assessed in the review were pain response (reactivity and regulation) and adverse events. The level of certainty in the evidence and risk of bias were based on the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the GRADE approach. We analysed the standardised mean difference (SMD) using the generic inverse variance method to determine effect sizes.  MAIN RESULTS: We included total of 138 studies (11,058 participants), which includes an additional 76 new studies for this update. Of these 138 studies, we analysed 115 (9048 participants) and described 23 (2010 participants) qualitatively. We described qualitatively studies that could not be meta-analysed due to being the only studies in their category or statistical reporting issues. We report the results of the 138 included studies here. An SMD effect size of 0.2 represents a small effect, 0.5 a moderate effect, and 0.8 a large effect. The thresholds for the I2 interpretation were established as follows: not important (0% to 40%); moderate heterogeneity (30% to 60%); substantial heterogeneity (50% to 90%); considerable heterogeneity (75% to 100%). The most commonly studied acute procedures were heel sticks (63 studies) and needlestick procedures for the purposes of vaccines/vitamins (35 studies). We judged most studies to have high risk of bias (103 out of 138), with the most common methodological concerns relating to blinding of personnel and outcome assessors. Pain responses were examined during two separate pain phases: pain reactivity (within the first 30 seconds after the acutely painful stimulus) and immediate pain regulation (after the first 30 seconds following the acutely painful stimulus). We report below the strategies with the strongest evidence base for each age group. In preterm born neonates, non-nutritive sucking may reduce pain reactivity (SMD -0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.03 to -0.11, moderate effect; I2 = 93%, considerable heterogeneity) and improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -0.61, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.27, moderate effect; I2 = 81%, considerable heterogeneity), based on very low-certainty evidence. Facilitated tucking may also reduce pain reactivity (SMD -1.01, 95% CI -1.44 to -0.58, large effect; I2 = 93%, considerable heterogeneity) and improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -0.59, 95% CI -0.92 to -0.26, moderate effect; I2 = 87%, considerable heterogeneity); however, this is also based on very low-certainty evidence. While swaddling likely does not reduce pain reactivity in preterm neonates (SMD -0.60, 95% CI -1.23 to 0.04, no effect; I2 = 91%, considerable heterogeneity), it has been shown to possibly improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -1.21, 95% CI -2.05 to -0.38, large effect; I2 = 89%, considerable heterogeneity), based on very low-certainty evidence. In full-term born neonates, non-nutritive sucking may reduce pain reactivity (SMD -1.13, 95% CI -1.57 to -0.68, large effect; I2 = 82%, considerable heterogeneity) and improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -1.49, 95% CI -2.20 to -0.78, large effect; I2 = 92%, considerable heterogeneity), based on very low-certainty evidence.  In full-term born older infants, structured parent involvement was the intervention most studied. Results showed that this intervention has little to no effect in reducing pain reactivity (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.03, no effect; I2 = 46%, moderate heterogeneity) or improving immediate pain regulation (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.21, no effect; I2 = 74%, substantial heterogeneity), based on low- to moderate-certainty evidence. Of these five interventions most studied, only two studies observed adverse events, specifically vomiting (one preterm neonate) and desaturation (one full-term neonate hospitalised in the NICU) following the non-nutritive sucking intervention. The presence of considerable heterogeneity limited our confidence in the findings for certain analyses, as did the preponderance of evidence of very low to low certainty based on GRADE judgements.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, non-nutritive sucking, facilitated tucking, and swaddling may reduce pain behaviours in preterm born neonates. Non-nutritive sucking may also reduce pain behaviours in full-term neonates. No interventions based on a substantial body of evidence showed promise in reducing pain behaviours in older infants. Most analyses were based on very low- or low-certainty grades of evidence and none were based on high-certainty evidence. Therefore, the lack of confidence in the evidence would require further research before we could draw a definitive conclusion.

Maternal voice reduces procedural pain in neonates: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Procedural pain management is a very important part in the clinical care of neonates. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of maternal voice on neonatal procedural pain, to provide insights to the clinical pain care of neonates.

METHODS

Two researchers independently searched PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, China Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang and Weipu Database for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving the effects of maternal voice on the procedural pain of neonates up to October 25, 2022. Two investigators screened the literature based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria and evaluated the methodological quality of the inclusion study. RevMan 5.3 software was used for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 8 RCTs with a total of 584 neonates were included. Our meta-analysis indicated that maternal voice reduces the pain score (SMD = -0.60, 95% CI: -0.81 to -0.39) and heart rate (SMD = -0.81, 95% CI: -1.44 to -0.18) and increases the comfort level (SMD = -0.47, 95% CI: -0.83 to -0.11) and blood oxygen saturation (SMD = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.03-1.38) during procedure (all P < .05). Moreover, maternal voice reduces the pain score (SMD = -0.58, 95% CI: -0.88 to -0.28) and heart rate (SMD = -0.44, 95% CI: -0.75 to -0.12) and increases the blood oxygen saturation (SMD = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.00 to -0.82) after procedure (all P < .05). No publication biases were detected by the funnel plots and Egger tests (all P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Maternal voice is beneficial to reduce procedural pain and improve the physiological indicators in neonates. It is still necessary to conduct high-quality, large sample studies in the future to further elucidate the effect of maternal voice on neonatal pain care.