Efficacy of Distraction for Reducing Pain and Distress Associated With Venipuncture in the Pediatric Posttransplant Population: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Benefits to Clinicians of Nonpharmacological Distraction During Pediatric Medical Procedure

CONTEXT

Nonpharmacologic distraction (NPD) during medical procedures in children is known to be beneficial to patients; however, no reviews have assessed their benefits to medical providers.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the benefits of NPD to medical providers.

DATA SOURCES

We searched 5 databases for relevant articles.

STUDY SELECTION

Peer-reviewed published randomized controlled trials comparing NPD with standard care that included children who had undergone medical procedures were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Primary outcomes were procedure time, number of medical staff involved, and initial success rate of venipuncture. Two reviewers assessed the risk of bias by using the Cochrane Collaboration (Oxford, United Kingdom)'s Randomized Controlled Trials Risk of Bias Tool, and we performed a meta-analysis to assess efficacy.

RESULTS

We included 22 trials with 1968 participants. The main NPD was audiovisual distraction, such as tablets. No significant difference was found in venipuncture procedure time (mean difference: -9.79; 95% confidence interval: -22.38 to 2.81; low certainty). We found no studies on the number of medical staff.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review did not find any clear NPD-associated benefit for the medical provider. The review included a small amount of literature, analyzed a small number of cases, and had a low certainty of evidence regarding procedure duration; therefore, further studies are needed to conclude the benefits to clinicians of NPD.

Effect of visual distraction on pain in adults undergoing colonoscopy: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pain is a contributing factor to the low compliance rate for performing a colonoscopy on screening for colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE

This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of visual distraction on adults undergoing colonoscopy.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library Database from their inception to February 2022. Randomized controlled trials comparing visual distraction with non-visual distraction were considered for inclusion. The fixed-effects and random-effects models were used to pool the data from individual studies and the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used to determine the methodology quality.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included four studies (N = 301) for pain level and total procedure time, three studies (N = 181) for satisfaction score, three studies (N = 196) for anxiety level, and four studie (N = 402) for willingness to repeat the procedure. The pooled analysis shown that significantly lower pain levels (SMD, - 0.25; 95% CI - 0.47 to - 0.02; P = 0.03), higher satisfaction score with the procedure (SMD, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.93; P < 0.0001), and higher willingness to repeat the procedure (OR, 2.66; 95% CI 1.70 to 4.17; P < 0.0001) in the visual distraction group than those in the non-visual distraction group, with no significant differences in total procedure time (SMD,- 0.07; 95% CI - 0.30 to 0.15; P = 0.53) or anxiety level (SMD,- 0.27; 95% CI - 0.55 to 0.01; P = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

Visual distraction improved the patient's pain, satisfaction, and willingness to repeat the procedure. Thus, visual stimulation is an effective way to reduce pain during colonoscopy and should be recommended.