HELPinKids&Adults Knowledge Synthesis of the Management of Vaccination Pain and High Levels of Needle Fear: Limitations of the Evidence and Recommendations for Future Research

Developing rights-based standards for children having tests, treatments, examinations and interventions: using a collaborative, multi-phased, multi-method and multi-stakeholder approach to build consensus

Children continue to experience harm when undergoing clinical procedures despite increased evidence of the need to improve the provision of child-centred care. The international ISupport collaboration aimed to develop standards to outline and explain good procedural practice and the rights of children within the context of a clinical procedure. The rights-based standards for children undergoing tests, treatments, investigations, examinations and interventions were developed using an iterative, multi-phased, multi-method and multi-stakeholder consensus building approach. This consensus approach used a range of online and face to face methods across three phases to ensure ongoing engagement with multiple stakeholders. The views and perspectives of 203 children and young people, 78 parents and 418 multi-disciplinary professionals gathered over a two year period (2020-2022) informed the development of international rights-based standards for the care of children having tests, treatments, examinations and interventions. The standards are the first to reach international multi-stakeholder consensus on definitions of supportive and restraining holds.    Conclusion: This is the first study of its kind which outlines international rights-based procedural care standards from multi-stakeholder perspectives. The standards offer health professionals and educators clear evidence-based tools to support discussions and practice changes to challenge prevailing assumptions about holding or restraining children and instead encourage a focus on the interests and rights of the child. What is Known: • Children continue to experience short and long-term harm when undergoing clinical procedures despite increased evidence of the need to improve the provision of child-centred care. • Professionals report uncertainty and tensions in applying evidence-based practice to children's procedural care. What is New: • This is the first study of its kind which has developed international rights-based procedural care standards from multi-stakeholder perspectives. • The standards are the first to reach international multi-stakeholder consensus on definitions of supportive and restraining holds.

Perception and willingness toward various immunization routes for COVID-19 vaccines: a cross-sectional survey in China

Background

To date, most vaccines, including the COVID-19 vaccine, are mainly administered by intramuscular injection, which might lead to vaccine hesitancy in some populations due to needle fear. Alternatively, needle-free immunization technology is extensively developed to improve the efficacy and acceptance of vaccination. However, there is no study to report the perception and willingness toward various immunization routes of the COVID-19 vaccine in the general population.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was conducted nationwide using an online questionnaire. Bivariate analyses were undertaken to assess variable associations among the participants who reported a hesitancy to receive the COVID-19 booster vaccination. Multivariable logistic regression with a backward step-wise approach was used to analyze the predicted factors associated with the willingness to receive the COVID-19 booster vaccination.

Results

A total of 3,244 valid respondents were included in this survey, and 63.2% of participants thought they had a good understanding of intramuscular injection, but only 20.7, 9.2, 9.4, and 6.0% of participants had a self-perceived good understanding of inhalation vaccine, nasal spray vaccine, oral vaccine, and microneedle patch vaccine. Correspondingly, there was high acceptance for intramuscular injection (76.5%), followed by oral inhalation (64.4%) and nasal spray (43.0%). Those participants who were only willing to receive an intramuscular vaccine had less vaccine knowledge (OR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.65-0.94) than those who were willing to receive a needle-free vaccine (OR = 1.97; 95% CI: 1.52-2.57). Some factors were found to be associated with vaccine hesitancy toward booster COVID-19 vaccination.

Conclusion

Needle-free vaccination is a promising technology for the next generation of vaccines, but we found that intramuscular injection was still the most acceptable immunization route in this survey. One major reason might be that most people lack knowledge about needle-free vaccination. We should strengthen the publicity of needle-free vaccination technology, and thus improve the acceptance and coverage of vaccination in different populations.

Adjuvanted-SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein-Based Microparticulate Vaccine Delivered by Dissolving Microneedles Induces Humoral, Mucosal, and Cellular Immune Responses in Mice

COVID-19 continues to cause an increase in the number of cases and deaths worldwide. Due to the ever-mutating nature of the virus, frequent vaccination against COVID-19 is anticipated. Most of the approved SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are administered using the conventional intramuscular route, causing vaccine hesitancy. Thus, there is a need for an effective, non-invasive vaccination strategy against COVID-19. This study evaluated the synergistic effects of a subunit microparticulate vaccine delivered using microneedles. The microparticles encapsulated a highly immunogenic subunit protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, such as the spike protein's receptor binding domain (RBD). Adjuvants were also incorporated to enhance the spike RBD-specific immune response. Our vaccination study reveals that a microneedle-based vaccine delivering these microparticles induced spike RBD-specific IgM, IgG, IgG1, IgG2a, and IgA antibodies. The vaccine also generated high levels of CD4+ and CD8a+ molecules in the secondary lymphoid organs. Overall, dissolving microneedles delivery spike RBD antigen in microparticulate form induced a robust immune response, paving the way for an alternative self-administrable, non-invasive vaccination strategy against COVID-19.

Vaccine Hesitancy in Pediatrics

Vaccine hesitancy is a growing complex and multifaceted phenomenon. It encompasses a wide spectrum of context-dependent attitudes and beliefs. Multiple factors influence parental decision-making including knowledge, sources of information, risk perception, trust, and individual experiences among others. This review focuses on describing the most common reasons that contribute to vaccine hesitancy among parents. Social media and the Internet have been described as major elements that can negatively influence parental decision-making regarding vaccines. The next focus is describing effective interventions that clinical providers can apply. Nonconfrontational and open discussions along with trusting and strong relationships between parents and providers seem to create a solid foundation toward vaccine acceptance. In addition, motivational interviewing is a helpful tool that has proven to be effective during these discussions. Ultimately, an individualized approach tailored to a specific community will likely be most effective in addressing vaccine hesitancy.

Reframe the Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Parent-Led Memory-Reframing Intervention

Negatively-biased pain memories (ie, recalling more pain as compared to earlier reports) are a robust predictor of future pain experiences. This randomized controlled trial examined the efficacy of a memory-reframing intervention to reframe children's pain memories. Sixty-five children (54% girls, M_age=5.35 years) underwent a tonsillectomy and reported their levels of post-surgical pain intensity and pain-related fear. 2 weeks post-surgery, children and 1 of their parents were randomized to the memory-reframing intervention or control group. Following control/intervention instructions, parents and children reminisced about the past surgery as they normally would (control) or using the memory-reframing strategies (intervention). Children recalled their post-surgical pain intensity and pain-related fear one week later. Parents reported the intervention's acceptability. Recruitment statistics were used to assess feasibility. Controlling for initial pain intensity ratings and using the Faces Pain Scale Revised, children in the intervention group reported more accurate/positively-biased memories for day 1 post-surgery pain intensity (M = 2.60/10; 95% CI, 1.62 to 3.68), compared to children in the control group (M = 4.11/10; 95% CI, 3.12 to 5.03), η_p² = .07, p = .040. The intervention was acceptable and feasible. Optimal parent-child reminiscing about a past pain experience resulted in children remembering their pain more accurately/positively. Clinicaltrials.gov:NCT03538730. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents results of the first randomized controlled trial examining the efficacy of parent-led memory-reframing intervention to change children's memories for pain. Children of parents who were taught and engaged in optimal reminiscing about a past surgery experience remembered their pain intensity more accurately/positively.

The fear of needles: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of needle fear and summarize the characteristics of individuals who exhibit this fear.

BACKGROUND

Injections are among the most common medical procedures, yet fear of needles can result in avoidance of preventive measures and treatment.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE (1966-2017), Embase (1947-2017), PsycINFO (1967-2017), and CINAHL (1961-2017) were searched, with no restrictions by age, gender, race, language, or country.

REVIEW METHODS

The prevalence of needle fear was calculated and restricted maximum likelihood random effects models were used for meta-analysis and meta-regression.

RESULTS

The search yielded 119 original research articles which are included in this review, of which 35 contained sufficient information for meta-analysis. The majority of children exhibited needle fear, while prevalence estimates for needle fear ranged from 20-50% in adolescents and 20-30% in young adults. In general, needle fear decreased with increasing age. Both needle fear and needle phobia were more prevalent in females than males. Avoidance of influenza vaccination because of needle fear occurred in 16% of adult patients, 27% of hospital employees, 18% of workers at long-term care facilities, and 8% of healthcare workers at hospitals. Needle fear was common when undergoing venipuncture, blood donation, and in those with chronic conditions requiring injection.

CONCLUSIONS

Fear of needles is common in patients requiring preventive care and in those undergoing treatment. Greater attention should be directed to interventions which alleviate fear in high-risk groups.

Needle size for vaccination procedures in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2015. The conclusions have not changed.Hypodermic needles of different sizes (gauges and lengths) can be used for vaccination procedures. The gauge (G) refers to the outside diameter of the needle tubing. The higher the gauge number, the smaller the diameter of the needle (e.g. a 23 G needle is 0.6 mm in diameter, whereas a 25 G needle is 0.5 mm in diameter). Many vaccines are recommended for injection into muscle (intramuscularly), although some are delivered subcutaneously (under the skin) and intradermally (into skin). Choosing an appropriate length and gauge of a needle may be important to ensure that a vaccine is delivered to the appropriate site and produces the maximum immune response while causing the least possible harm. Guidelines conflict regarding the sizes of needles that should be used for vaccinating children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of using needles of different sizes for administering vaccines to children and adolescents on vaccine immunogenicity (the ability of the vaccine to elicit an immune response), procedural pain, and other reactogenicity events (adverse events following vaccine administration).

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL to October 2017. We also searched proceedings of vaccine conferences and two trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials evaluating the effects of using hypodermic needles of any gauge or length to administer any type of vaccine to people aged from birth to 24 years.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently extracted trial data and assessed the risk of bias. We contacted trial authors for additional information. We rated the quality of evidence using the GRADE system.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five trials involving 1350 participants in the original review. The updated review identified no new trials. The evidence from two small trials (one trial including infants and one including adolescents) was insufficient to allow any definitive statements to be made about the effects of the needles evaluated in the trials on vaccine immunogenicity and reactogenicity.The remaining three trials (1135 participants) contributed data to comparisons between 25 G 25 mm, 23 G 25 mm, and 25 G 16 mm needles. These trials included infants predominantly aged from two to six months undergoing intramuscular vaccination in the anterolateral thigh using the World Health Organization (WHO) injection technique (skin stretched flat, needle inserted at a 90° angle and up to the needle hub in healthy infants). The vaccines administered were combination vaccines containing diphtheria, tetanus, and whole-cell pertussis antigens (DTwP). In some trials, the vaccines also contained Haemophilus influenzae type b (DTwP-Hib) and hepatitis B (DTwP-Hib-Hep B) antigen components.Primary outcomesIncidence of vaccine-preventable diseases: No trials reported this outcome.Procedural pain and crying: Using a wider gauge 23 G 25 mm needle may slightly reduce procedural pain (low-quality evidence) and probably leads to a slight reduction in the duration of crying time immediately after vaccination (moderate-quality evidence) compared with a narrower gauge 25 G 25 mm needle (one trial, 320 participants). The effects are probably not large enough to be clinically relevant.Secondary outcomesImmune response: There is probably little or no difference in immune response, defined in terms of the proportion of seroprotected infants, between use of 25 G 25 mm, 23 G 25 mm, or 25 G 16 mm needles to administer a series of three doses of a DTwP-Hib vaccine at ages two, three, and four months (moderate-quality evidence, one trial, numbers of participants in analyses range from 309 to 402. The immune response to the pertussis antigen was not measured).Severe and non-severe local reactions: 25 mm needles (either 25 G or 23 G) probably lead to fewer severe and non-severe local reactions after DTwP-Hib vaccination compared with 25 G 16 mm needles (moderate-quality evidence, one trial, 447 to 458 participants in analyses). We estimate that one fewer infant will experience a severe local reaction (extensive redness and swelling) after the first vaccine dose for every 25 infants vaccinated with the longer rather than the shorter needle (number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) with a 25 G 25 mm needle: 25 (95% confidence interval (CI) 15 to 100); NNTB with a 23 G 25 mm needle: 25 (95% CI 17 to 100)). We estimate that one fewer infant will experience a non-severe local reaction (any redness, swelling, tenderness, or hardness (composite outcome)) at 24 hours after the first vaccine dose for every 5 or 6 infants vaccinated with a 25 mm rather than a 16 mm needle (NNTB with a 25 G 25 mm needle: 5 (95% CI 4 to 10); NNTB with a 23 G 25 mm needle: 6 (95% CI 4 to 13)). The results are similar after the second and third vaccine doses.Using a narrow gauge 25 G 25 mm needle may produce a small reduction in the incidence of local reactions after each dose of a DTwP vaccine compared with a wider gauge 23 G 25 mm needle, but the effect estimates are imprecise (low-quality evidence, two trials, 100 to 459 participants in analyses).Systemic reactions: The comparative effects of 23 G 25 mm, 25 G 25 mm, and 25 G 16 mm needles on the incidence of postvaccination fever and other systemic events such as drowsiness, loss of appetite, and vomiting are uncertain due to the very low quality of the evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Using 25 mm needles (either 23 G or 25 G) for intramuscular vaccination procedures in the anterolateral thigh of infants using the WHO injection technique probably reduces the occurrence of local reactions while achieving a comparable immune response to 25 G 16 mm needles. These findings are applicable to healthy infants aged two to six months receiving combination DTwP vaccines with a reactogenic whole-cell pertussis antigen component. These vaccines are predominantly used in low- and middle-income countries. The applicability of the findings to vaccines with acellular pertussis components and other vaccines with different reactogenicity profiles is uncertain.

How are children who are delayed in the Childhood Vaccination Programme vaccinated: A nationwide register-based cohort study of Danish children aged 15-24 months and semi-structured interviews with vaccination providers

Aims: Delay of childhood vaccinations is common and influences efforts to reduce targeted diseases. In Denmark, the diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio and Haemophilus influenzae type b (DTaP-IPV-Hib) vaccine is recommended at ages 3, 5 and 12 months and the first measles-mumps-rubella vaccine (MMR-1) at 15 months. Following guidelines, children delayed at age 15 months should receive MMR-1 and DTaP-IPV-Hib-3 simultaneously, unless DTaP-IPV-Hib-2 was received less than 6 months ago, when MMR-1 alone is recommended. We studied compliance with these guidelines and the reasons for non-compliance with a focus on vaccination providers. Methods: We used a nationwide register-based cohort study of children born in Denmark between January 2000 and June 2013, who were lacking MMR-1 and DTaP-IPV-Hib-3 at age 15 months and were followed to 24 months. We also performed semi-structured telephone interviews with vaccination providers. Results: The study consisted of 156,921 children (18% of the children born in the period). Among the 40,060 children who had received DTaP-IPV-Hib-2 less than 6 months ago, 37,892 (95%) received MMR-1 alone. Among the 88,469 children who had received DTaP-IPV-Hib-2 more than 6 months ago, 6334 (7%) received DTaP-IPV-Hib-3 and MMR-1 simultaneously. The interviews indicated that some vaccination providers are reluctant to give multiple vaccinations at the same visit and some have a preference of following the usual sequence in the programme. Conclusions: Vaccination providers generally complied with the recommended minimum 6 months' interval between DTaP-IPV-Hib-2 and DTaP-IPV-Hib-3. Conversely, there was a low compliance with the recommendation to administer DTaP-IPV-Hib-3 and MMR-1 simultaneously. More efforts are needed to ensure timely vaccination.

Effect of virtual reality headset for pediatric fear and pain distraction during immunization

Aim: Fear of needles is a well-known phobia among children and adults. This study presents the rationale, feasibility and results of a pilot study applying a virtual reality (VR) headset as a fear reduction and pain distraction during immunizations. Patients & methods: 17 subjects and 17 parents rated their fear and pain level pre- and postimmunization using Wong–Baker pain scale and McMurtry children's fear scale. Immunization was provided, while subject was wearing a VR headset. Results: Ratings of anticipated versus actual fear and pain due to immunizations improved following use of the VR headset in 94.1% of pediatric subjects. Conclusion: The use of a VR headset was well received and reduced overall fear and pain in children receiving immunizations.

The number of injected same-day preschool vaccines relates to preadolescent needle fear and HPV uptake

PURPOSE

Fear of needles develops at approximately five years of age, and decreases compliance with healthcare. We sought to examine the relationship of preschool vaccine history, parent and preadolescent needle fear, and subsequent compliance with optional vaccines.

METHODS

As part of a private practice randomized controlled trial, parents and 10-12year olds rated needle anxiety on a 100mm visual analog scale. This follow-up cohort study compared their needle anxiety to previous vaccination records, including number of vaccinations between ages four and six years (total and same-day maximum), and subsequent initiation of the HPV vaccine through age 13.

RESULTS

Of the 120 preadolescents enrolled between 4.28.09 and 1.19.2010, 117 received preschool vaccinations between ages four and six years. The likelihood of being in the upper quartile of fear (VAS≥83) five years later increased with each additional same-day injection (OR=3.108, p=0.0100 95%CI=1.311, 7.367), but was not related to total lifetime or total four-to-six year injections. Only 12.5% (15) of parents reported anxiety about their preadolescents' vaccines (VAS>50). Parent and child anxiety was weakly correlated (r=0.15). Eight children in the upper fear quartile began their HPV series (26.67%) compared to 14 in the lower quartile (48.28% VAS<32) (OR 2.57, p=0.0889, 95%CI 0.864-7.621); there was no difference in HPV uptake between upper and lower quartile of parent anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

The more same-day preschool injections between 4 and 6years of age, the more likely a child was to fear needles five years later. Preadolescent needle fear was a stronger predictor than parent vaccine anxiety of subsequent HPV vaccine uptake.

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.

Simple Psychological Interventions for Reducing Pain From Common Needle Procedures in Adults: Systematic Review of Randomized and Quasi-Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of simple psychological interventions for managing pain and fear in adults undergoing vaccination or related common needle procedures (ie, venipuncture/venous cannulation).

DESIGN/METHODS

Databases were searched to identify relevant randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials. Self-reported pain and fear were prioritized as critically important outcomes. Data were combined using standardized mean difference (SMD) or relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

No studies involving vaccination met inclusion criteria; evidence was drawn from 8 studies of other common needle procedures (eg, venous cannulation, venipuncture) in adults. Two trials evaluating the impact of neutral signaling of the impending procedure (eg, "ready?") as compared with signaling of impending pain (eg, "sharp scratch") demonstrated lower pain when signaled about the procedure (n=199): SMD=-0.97 (95% CI, -1.26, -0.68), after removal of 1 trial where self-reported pain was significantly lower than the other 2 included trials. Two trials evaluated music distraction (n=156) and demonstrated no difference in pain: SMD=0.10 (95% CI, -0.48, 0.27), or fear: SMD=-0.25 (95% CI, -0.61, 0.10). Two trials evaluated visual distraction and demonstrated no difference in pain (n=177): SMD=-0.57 (95% CI, -1.82, 0.68), or fear (n=81): SMD=-0.05 (95% CI, -0.50, 0.40). Two trials evaluating breathing interventions found less pain in intervention groups (n=138): SMD=-0.82 (95% CI, -1.21, -0.43). The quality of evidence across all trials was very low.

CONCLUSIONS

There are no published studies of simple psychological interventions for vaccination pain in adults. There is some evidence of a benefit from other needle procedures for breathing strategies and neutral signaling of the start of the procedure. There is no evidence for use of music or visual distraction.

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.

Psychological Interventions for Vaccine Injections in Children and Adolescents: Systematic Review of Randomized and Quasi-Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of psychological interventions for reducing vaccination pain and related outcomes in children and adolescents.

DESIGN/METHODS

Database searches identified relevant randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials. Data were extracted and pooled using established methods. Pain, fear, and distress were considered critically important outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included; 2 included adolescents. Findings showed no benefit of false suggestion (n=240) for pain (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.21 [-0.47, 0.05]) or distress (SMD -0.28 [-0.59, 0.11]), or for use of repeated reassurance (n=82) for pain (SMD -0.18 [-0.92, 0.56]), fear (SMD -0.18 [-0.71, 0.36]), or distress (SMD 0.10 [-0.33, 0.54]). Verbal distraction (n=46) showed reduced distress (SMD -1.22 [-1.87, -0.58]), but not reduced pain (SMD -0.27 [-1.02, 0.47]). Similarly, video distraction (n=328) showed reduced distress (SMD -0.58 [-0.82, -0.34]), but not reduced pain (SMD -0.88 [-1.78, 0.02]) or fear (SMD 0.08 [-0.25, 0.41]). Music distraction demonstrated reduced pain when used with children (n=417) (SMD -0.45 [-0.71, -0.18]), but not with adolescents (n=118) (SMD -0.04 [-0.42, 0.34]). Breathing with a toy (n=368) showed benefit for pain (SMD -0.49 [-0.85, -0.13]), but not fear (SMD -0.60 [-1.22, 0.02]); whereas breathing without a toy (n=136) showed no benefit for pain (SMD -0.27 [-0.61, 0.07]) or fear (SMD -0.36 [-0.86, 0.15]). There was no benefit for a breathing intervention (cough) in children and adolescents (n=136) for pain (SMD -0.17 [-0.41, 0.07]).

CONCLUSIONS

Psychological interventions with some evidence of benefit in children include: verbal distraction, video distraction, music distraction, and breathing with a toy.

Procedural and Physical Interventions for Vaccine Injections: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials and Quasi-Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of physical and procedural interventions for reducing pain and related outcomes during vaccination.

DESIGN/METHODS

Databases were searched using a broad search strategy to identify relevant randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials. Data were extracted according to procedure phase (preprocedure, acute, recovery, and combinations of these) and pooled using established methods.

RESULTS

A total of 31 studies were included. Acute infant distress was diminished during intramuscular injection without aspiration (n=313): standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.18, -0.46). Injecting the most painful vaccine last during vaccinations reduced acute infant distress (n=196): SMD -0.69 (95% CI: -0.98, -0.4). Simultaneous injections reduced acute infant distress compared with sequential injections (n=172): SMD -0.56 (95% CI: -0.87, -0.25). There was no benefit of simultaneous injections in children. Less infant distress during the acute and recovery phases combined occurred with vastus lateralis (vs. deltoid) injections (n=185): SMD -0.70 (95% CI: -1.00, -0.41). Skin-to-skin contact in neonates (n=736) reduced acute distress: SMD -0.65 (95% CI: -1.05, -0.25). Holding infants reduced acute distress after removal of the data from 1 methodologically diverse study (n=107): SMD -1.25 (95% CI: -2.05, -0.46). Holding after vaccination (n=417) reduced infant distress during the acute and recovery phases combined: SMD -0.65 (95% CI: -1.08, -0.22). Self-reported fear was reduced for children positioned upright (n=107): SMD -0.39 (95% CI: -0.77, -0.01). Non-nutritive sucking (n=186) reduced acute distress in infants: SMD -1.88 (95% CI: -2.57, -1.18). Manual tactile stimulation did not reduce pain across the lifespan. An external vibrating device and cold reduced pain in children (n=145): SMD -1.23 (95% CI: -1.58, -0.87). There was no benefit of warming the vaccine in adults. Muscle tension was beneficial in selected indices of fainting in adolescents and adults.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions with evidence of benefit in select populations include: no aspiration, injecting most painful vaccine last, simultaneous injections, vastus lateralis injection, positioning interventions, non-nutritive sucking, external vibrating device with cold, and muscle tension.