Effectiveness of facilitated tucking on reducing pain during heel stick in neonates: a randomized controlled experimental study

Background

Pain in neonates is associated with adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes in the later days of life. Facilitated tucking is a nonpharmacological method of pain relief. The study aims to compare the effect of facilitated tucking in pain reduction in neonates.

Materials and methods

This was a randomized controlled experimental study conducted in the neonatal ward of a tertiary care center. There were 25 neonates randomized each in the experimental and control groups (total of 50), based on computer-generated random tables. The experimental group was placed in a facilitated tucking position during heel stick, while the control group was kept in the usual position, as done routinely. A self-structured questionnaire and Neonatal Infant Pain Scale were used. The main outcome measures were the mean Neonatal Infant Pain Scale score, and change in preprocedure and postprocedure heart rate and oxygen saturation in the two groups. Ethical clearance and informed written consent were sought.

Results

Neonates in the experimental group had significantly lesser pain (less Neonatal Infant Pain Scale score) than the neonates in the control group (P<0.001). There was also a significant increment in the mean heart rate and a decrease in the oxygen saturation after the procedure in the control group, indicating significantly more pain perception (P<0.001) in the control group.

Conclusions

Facilitated tucking was found to be effective in reducing the pain during heel stick procedures in neonates.

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.

A systematic review of improved positions and supporting devices for premature infants in the NICU

Background

In the neonatal intensive care unit, nurses often place premature infants in the supine, prone, and lateral positions. However, these positions do not always meet all the physiological needs of premature infants. Thus, many improved positions and various position-supporting devices have been studied to provide infants with a development-friendly and comfortable environment.

Aim

We aimed to help nurses recognize and understand the various improved positions and devices, and to provide nurses with more options in addressing the needs of preterm infants.

Study design

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE from 2012 to 2022 for studies on position management of preterm infants, and screened the search results according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Then we extracted data and evaluated the quality of the included studies. Finally, we conducted a qualitative summary of the results.

Results

Twenty-one articles were included in this review. Fourteen were studies about improved positions, including hammock position, facilitated tucking position, ROP position, reverse kangaroo mother care position (R-KMC), and supported diagonal flexion position (SDF). Seven were studies on positioning devices, four on cranial deformity prevention, and three on reformative swaddling. They have a positive impact on sleep and flexion maintenance, in addition, they can prevent head deformity and reduce the pain of premature infants.

Conclusion

The position management of premature infants is diversified. Instead of sticking to a single position placement, nurses should adjust the position according to the unique physiological conditions of infants to reduce sequelae and promote their recovery and growth during long-term hospitalization. There should be more studies on position management with large sample sizes in the future.

Efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological interventions for endotracheal suctioning pain in preterm infants: A systematic review

AIM

To review and analyse the evidence on the efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological interventions for preterm infants to relieve endotracheal suctioning (ES) pain.

DESIGN

A systematic review per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

METHODS

Six databases were searched with a retrieval strategy. Parallel and crossover randomized controlled trials reporting non-pharmacological interventions for relieving ES pain in preterm infants were identified from inception to 1 September 2021. The protocol was published in PROSPERO (CRD42021276058).

RESULTS

Ten studies were retrieved, including nine different non-pharmacological interventions. Seven studies reported that non-pharmacological interventions in relieving pain were more effective than conventional care during ES, and three trials reported its safety. Due to the heterogeneity of pain assessment tools, time of assessment and population, only Facilitated tucking had sufficient evidence that it is a safe and effective non-pharmacological intervention.

Gentle Touch and Sucrose for Pain Relief during Suctioning in Preterm Newborns-A Randomized Clinical Trial

Pain management is challenging in neonatal care. We aimed to compare the effects of gentle touch and sucrose on pain relief during suctioning in premature newborns (PTNB). This crossover randomized clinical trial enrolled PTNBs with low birth weight, hemodynamically stable, and requiring suctioning during hospitalization in the neonatal intensive care unit. PTNBs underwent three different suctioning procedures. The first was performed without intervention (baseline). Right after, PTNBs were randomly allocated (sucrose and gentle touch or vice versa) to the next two suctioning procedures. Two validated scales assessed pain: the Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS) and the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R). We evaluated 50 PTNBs (mean of 28 weeks) with a mean low birth weight of 1050 g; most were under continuous positive airway pressure 37 (74%) and mechanical ventilation 41 (82%). Gentle touch was efficacious for pain relief since NIPS (p = 0.010) compared to baseline. Sucrose was also effective in reducing pain NIPS and PIPP-R (p < 0.001). Although the two interventions reduced pain, no difference was observed between gentle touch and sucrose.

An integrative review of clinician-administered comforting touch interventions and acute stress responses of preterm infants

PROBLEM

Preterm infants experience numerous stressors in the neonatal intensive care unit. Non-pharmacological interventions, including maternal comforting touch, reduce stress responses of preterm infants; however, the effects of clinician-administered comforting touch are unclear. The purpose of this integrative review was to synthesize findings from clinical trials to determine the effect of clinician-administered comforting touch on preterm infants' acute stress responses.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Eligible clinical trials were published in English between 2001 and October 2021 and reported effects of clinician-administered comforting touch on acute stress responses in preterm infants.

SAMPLE

Thirty clinical trials were included.

RESULTS

Researchers tested the effect of comforting static touch, massage, massage with kinesthetic stimulation, sensorial saturation, and Yakson. There was significant heterogeneity in study design, comparison condition, and context of intervention delivery. Results varied; some studies demonstrated efficacy of comforting touch in reducing acute stress responses and others showed no effect. Generally, comforting touch provided during stressful procedures was associated with lower stress responses compared to standard care and was an effective adjunct to other stress management strategies. However, comforting touch alone was insufficient for managing pain, especially during skin-breaking procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

While comforting touch may be a useful part of stress management plans for preterm infants, additional research is needed to determine when comforting touch is appropriate and effective.

IMPLICATIONS

Comforting touch is beneficial to preterm infants and should be provided for stress management. For highly intrusive or painful procedures, comforting touch can be provided as part of a comprehensive stress management plan.

The Effect of Breastfeeding, Kangaroo Care, and Facilitated Tucking Positioning in Reducing the Pain During Heel Stick in Neonates

PURPOSE

Invasive intervention can negatively affect prognosis, behavior, environmental adaptation in neonates. Some nonpharmacological pain management methods are used for effective pain treatment. This study investigated the effect of breastfeeding, kangaroo care, and facilitated tucking positioning on heel-stick pain in neonates.

DESIGN

A quasi-experimental design was employed. The study was conducted in three family health centers in Kütahya/Turkey. The sample consisted of 140 healthy neonates with the gestational age of 37 weeks or more, birth weight greater than 2500 g, and no sucking problems. The sample was divided into four groups (breastfeeding, kangaroo care, facilitated tucking position, and control). Data were collected using a Baby-Mother Characteristics Questionnaire, a Physiological Parameter Follow-up Form, and the Neonatal Infant Pain Scale. Data were analyzed using chi-square, the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Kruskal-Wallis, Student t-test, and Mann-Whitney U tests. The research adhered to ethical principles.

RESULTS

The facilitated tucking position group cried less and experienced less pain during heel stick than the other groups (p < 0.05). Breastfeeding, kangaroo care, and facilitating tucking help reduce heel-stick pain but facilitating tucking causes less crying and imposes less pain on neonates than the other methods.

CONCLUSION

Facilitated tucking position may be preferred to reduce pain during heel stick.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Using facilitated tucking positions and breastfeeding methods can assist healthcare professionals as supportive methods in pain management.

Pain in Preterm Infants: Different Perspectives

In the last decades, there has been a tremendous change in approaching and managing neonates' pain. These changes began with rebutting the previous misconception about neonates' , particularly preterm infants' , pain. The development in neuroimaging has revealed that by 24 weeks of gestation the peripheral nervous system is mature and function fully. Researchers now know that neonates experience pain and premature infants have even lower pain thresholds. Since that time, a mounting amount of literature has addressed the issue of neonatal pain. Many pharmacological and non pharmacological pain reduction strategies have been investigated for their safety and analgesic effectiveness. Many interventions such as nonnutritive sucking (NNS), skin-to-skin contact (SSC), and facilitated tucking are effective in controlling neonates pain.

Supportive Interventions to Reduce Pain and Stress During Ophthalmic Examinations for Retinopathy of Prematurity in Premature Infants

BACKGROUND

Ophthalmic examinations are a frequent source of pain and stress in premature infants. There is evidence for the use of supportive interventions during infant ophthalmic examinations to reduce pain and stress, but there are no standard recommendations for their implementation.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this quality improvement project was to implement evidence-based, supportive interventions during ophthalmic examinations in premature infants and evaluate the impact on pain, oxygen saturation, heart rate, bradycardic events, and neonatal stress cues.

METHODS

A preintervention and intervention group design was used. Primary outcomes were pain and oxygen saturation. Secondary outcomes were heart rate, number of bradycardic events, and number of neonatal stress cues. Independent-sample t tests were used to compare means of the measures in the preintervention and intervention groups.

RESULTS

Supportive interventions during ophthalmic examinations significantly reduced infant pain (during and after the examination), number of bradycardic events (during and after the examination), and number of neonatal stress cues (before, during, and after the examination). There was also a trend for supportive interventions to decrease pain before the examination.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Supportive interventions during ophthalmic examinations are effective in reducing pain, bradycardic events, and neonatal stress cues in premature infants and can be successfully implemented as part of a unit-based protocol.

IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH

Future research is needed to determine the long-term outcomes associated with supportive interventions during ophthalmic examinations in premature infants.

Positioning Effects for Procedural Pain Relief in NICU: Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the literature regarding the effectiveness of different positioning methods for procedural pain relief in neonates admitted to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU).

DESIGN

A systemized search of the literature was carried out by means of two independent evaluators through the systematic search of electronic index databases.

DATA SOURCES

A search for relevant studies was performed in four databases (Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and BVS-BIREME).

REVIEW/ANALYSIS METHODS

Manual searches were conducted on suitable references from the included articles, and 1,941 publications were eligible for the analysis. The flowchart for the articles' selection was based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria, and in relation to bias risks according to the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale.

RESULTS

Based on the inclusion criteria, only 20 publications remained. According to the PEDro scale, 75% of the studies presented good methodological quality, with scores between 6 and 8, and 5% scored ≤4 points. None of them were blinded in relation to the therapies, but all of them performed intergroup statistical comparisons. According to the results of this review, we recommend facilitated tucking by parents (FTP) in NICU of at least 30 minutes duration, starting 15 minutes before, during the painful procedure, and 15 minutes after to relieve pain and to stabilize the physiological, hormonal, and behavioral responses of the newborns.

CONCLUSIONS

Positioning should be used as a nonpharmacological strategy for procedural pain relief in newborns. This review showed that facilitated tucking by parents for 30 minutes was the best position for pain relief in premature newborns during procedures in the NICU. Positioning is recommended as a nonpharmacological method for pain relief; FTP of at least 30 minutes duration should be the first positioning choice during procedures in the NICU.

Establishing a Foundation for Optimal Feeding Outcomes in the NICU

Many infants in the NICU experience difficulties with oral feeding, which contribute to prolonged length of stay. Oral feeding is a complex task involving sensorimotor functioning of the face, mouth, and larynx, as well as coordination of sucking, swallowing, and breathing. The care provided in the NICU starting at birth sets the stage for future oral feeding. The purpose of this article is to describe strategies that will establish a positive foundation to support optimal oral feeding. Nurses can use these strategies to protect newborns from noxious stimuli and promote positive auditory, tactile, gustatory, and olfactory experiences to optimize neurodevelopment for the complex task of feeding.

The effect of facilitated tucking position during painful procedure in pain management of preterm infants in neonatal intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effects of facilitated tucking position during painful procedure in pain management of preterm infants. We searched MEDLINE, PEDro, SciELO and the Cochrane Library (until June 2019) for randomized controlled trials. An α value ≤ 0.05 was considered significant. Heterogeneity among studies was examined with Cochran's Q and I² statistic, in which values greater than 40% were considered indicative of high heterogeneity and random-effects model was chosen. Analyses were performed with Review Manager 5.3. Fifteen studies met the eligibility criteria, including 664 preterm infants. The meta-analyses showed a significant reduction in pain of - 1.02 (95% CI - 1.7 to - 0.4, N = 216) during endotraqueal suctioning for participants in the facilitated tucking position group (FTPG) compared with routine care group. The meta-analyses showed a non-significant difference in pain - 0.3 (95% CI - 2.05 to - 1.4, N = 88) during heel stick for participants in the FTPG compared with oral glucose group. The meta-analyses showed a non-significant difference in pain for participants in the FTPG compared with oral opioid group 0.2 (95% CI - 1.4 to 1.8, N = 140).Conclusion: Facilitated tucking position may improve the pain during painful procedures.What is Known:• Exposure of premature babies to painful procedures is associated with changes in brain development, regardless of other factors.• Facilitated tucking reduces the expression of pain in premature infants.What is New:• Facilitated tucking position was efficient in pain management of preterm infants when compared to routine care.• Facilitated tucking compared to opioid or oral glucose did not achieve a significant reduction in pain intensity.

Efficacy of facilitated tucking combined with non-nutritive sucking on very preterm infants' pain during the heel-stick procedure: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Reducing acute pain in premature infants during neonatal care improves their neurophysiological development. The use of pharmacological and non-pharmacological analgesia, such as sucrose, is limited per day, particularly for very preterm infants. Thus, the usual practice of non-nutritive sucking is often used alone. Facilitated tucking could be an additional strategy to non-nutritive sucking for reducing pain. To the best of our knowledge, no randomized trial has compared the combination of facilitated tucking and non-nutritive sucking to non-nutritive sucking alone.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of facilitated tucking in combination with non-nutritive sucking (intervention group) to non-nutritive sucking alone (control group) in reducing pain during the heel-stick procedure in very preterm infants.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized controlled trial.

SETTINGS

Level III and II neonatal care units, including the neurosensory care management program.

METHODS

Very preterm infants (gestational age between 28 and 32 weeks) were randomly assigned by a computer programme to the intervention or control group during a heel-stick procedure within the first 48 h of life. In both groups, infants were placed in an asymmetric position on a cushion; noise and light were limited following routine care. A heel-stick was performed first in the care sequence. In the intervention group, facilitated tucking was performed by a nurse or nursing assistant. The procedure was video recorded from 15 s (T-15 s) before the procedure until three minutes (T + 3 min) after the end of the procedure. Pain was blindly assessed by two independent specialist nurses. The primary outcome was the pain score evaluated 15 s before the procedure and 30 s immediately after by the premature infant pain profile (PIPP) scale. The secondary outcome was the pain score evaluated between T-15 s and T + 3 min by the DAN scale (a French acronym for the acute pain of a newborn).

RESULTS

Sixty infants were included (30 in each group). The PIPP pain scores did not differ between the intervention group (median: 8.0; interquartile range (IQR): 6.0-12.0) and the control group (median: 9.5; IQR: 7.0-13.0, p = 0.32). Pain assessed by the DAN scale at T + 3 min was lower in the intervention group than in the control group (median: 0.3; IQR: 0.0-1.0 and 2.0; IQR: 0.5-3.0, respectively, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The combined use of facilitated tucking and non-nutritive sucking did not significantly alleviate pain during the heel-stick procedure. However, the addition of facilitated tucking facilitated faster pain recovery following the heel-stick procedure.

The effect of the facilitated tucking position on pain intensity during heel stick blood sampling in premature infants: a surprising result

Background: According to research findings, pain experience in neonatal period leads to short- and long-term complications that could be prevented by means of neonatal pain relief. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effect of facilitated tucking position on neonatal pain during heel prick blood sampling. Methods: This is a cross over clinical trial was done on 40 premature neonates. During blood sampling, neonates were put in either facilitated tucking or routine positions randomly and Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) was completed for each neonate. In the next sampling time, positions were changed and the process repeated. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, repeated measure ANOVA, and independent t-test. Results: Results showed that the mean pain intensity in each position was increased during sampling (p = .0001) and after that was decreased significantly (p = .001), but before, during, and after sampling there was no significant difference between the two positions (p > .05). Conclusions: Overall findings showed that comparing neonates in the two positions; there was no significant difference in their pain intensity. These results are almost in contrast with many researches findings in this area. It seems there is a need to further investigation regarding this subject.

Does noninvasive electrical stimulation of acupuncture points reduce heelstick pain in neonates?

AIM

Noninvasive electrical stimulation at acupuncture points (NESAP) for analgesia is used in children, but has not been widely studied in neonates. The purpose of this study was to determine whether NESAP alone or in combination with sucrose relieved heelstick pain in neonates.

METHODS

Term neonates (n = 162) receiving routine heelsticks for newborn screening were enrolled following parental consent. All infants received facilitated tucking and non-nutritive sucking. Neonates were randomised to standard care, sucrose, NESAP or sucrose plus NESAP. NESAP (3.5 mA, 10 Hz) or sham was administered over four acupuncture points. The Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP), heart rate variability (HRV) and salivary cortisol were used to measure heelstick pain.

RESULTS

PIPP scores among all four treatment groups increased during heelstick, F (9,119) = 1.95, p = 0.05 and NESAP therapy had no significant effect on PIPP scores. However, PIPP scores from baseline to heelstick increased the most in the two groups not receiving sucrose (p < 0.01). Mean PIPP scores remained below five during the heelstick in all four groups, indicating minimal or no pain. Differences in HRV and salivary cortisol among groups were insignificant.

CONCLUSION

NESAP at 3.5 mA, 10 Hz is not effective in relieving pain during heelsticks in neonates.

Analgesia, nil or placebo to babies, in trials that test new analgesic treatments for procedural pain

This review assessed how often neonates in control groups experienced unnecessary pain during clinical trials involving procedural pain. We retrieved 45 studies in the 30 months up to June 2015 and found that in 29 (64%) the control babies received either placebos or no treatment. Placebos were used in 15/25 (60%) studies involving heel pricks and in 6/8 (75%) involving venepuncture.

CONCLUSION

Despite international guidelines, neonates included in control groups during painful procedures do not receive analgesia in the majority of cases. Several historical reasons can explain this, but in the light of present knowledge, this should not continue. Ethical committees are thereof invited since now to not permit clinical trials that do not explicitly rule out pain during treatments and journals are invited to not publish them.

The effect of the facilitated tucking position in reducing vaccination-induced pain in newborns

Background

This study was conducted to evaluate the pain perceptions of newborns during the hepatitis B (HBV) vaccinations performed in the facilitated tucking position and the classical holding position, respectively.

Methods

The randomized controlled experimental study was conducted between 1 September 2014 and 30 December 2014 at the neonatal intensive care unit of a Turkish university hospital. One group of infants was held in the facilitated tucking position (the treatment group; n = 30) during HBV vaccination; infants in the other group were held in the classical holding position (the control group; n = 30) during HBV vaccination. The Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS) scores of the infants in the treatment and control groups were compared during procedure. Also, the infants’ physiological parameters were compared before, during, and after the procedure. Descriptive statistics, a chi-square test, and an independent samples t-test were used to assess the data.

Results

The mean pain scores of infants vaccinated in the facilitated tucking position (2.83 ± 1.18) were significantly statistically lower than the scores of infants vaccinated in the classical holding position (6.47 ± 1.07) (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The pain perceptions of newborns held in the facilitated tucking position during HBV vaccination were lower. The facilitated tucking position, a non-pharmacological method, is recommended as an effective and useful method for reducing pain during the procedure.