Reduced infant response to a routine care procedure after sucrose analgesia

Sucrose analgesia for heel-lance procedures in neonates

BACKGROUND

Sucrose has been examined for calming and pain-relieving effects in neonates for invasive procedures such as heel lance.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of sucrose for relieving pain from heel lance in neonates in terms of immediate and long-term outcomes SEARCH METHODS: We searched (February 2022): CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, and three trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials where term and/or preterm neonates received sucrose for heel lances. Comparison treatments included water/placebo/no intervention, non-nutritive sucking (NNS), glucose, breastfeeding, breast milk, music, acupuncture, facilitated tucking, and skin-to-skin care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. We reported mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed-effect model for continuous outcome measures. We assessed heterogeneity by the I2 test. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 55 trials (6273 infants): 29 included term neonates, 22 included preterm neonates, and four included both. Heel lance was investigated in 50 trials; 15 investigated other minor painful procedures in addition to lancing. Sucrose vs control The evidence suggests that sucrose probably results in a reduction in PIPP scores compared to the control group at 30 seconds (MD -1.74 (95% CI -2.11 to -1.37); I2 = 62%; moderate-certainty evidence) and 60 seconds after lancing (MD -2.14, 95% CI -3.34 to -0.94; I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of sucrose on DAN scores compared to water at 30 seconds after lancing (MD -1.90, 95% CI -8.58 to 4.78; heterogeneity not applicable (N/A); very low-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that sucrose probably results in a reduction in NIPS scores compared to water immediately after lancing (MD -2.00, 95% CI -2.42 to -1.58; heterogeneity N/A; moderate-certainty evidence). Sucrose vs NNS The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sucrose on PIPP scores compared to NNS during the recovery period after lancing (MD 0.60, 95% CI -0.30 to 1.50; heterogeneity not applicable; very low-certainty evidence) and on DAN scores at 30 seconds after lancing (MD -1.20, 95% CI -7.87 to 5.47; heterogeneity N/A; very low-certainty evidence). Sucrose + NNS vs NNS The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sucrose + NNS on PIPP scores compared to NNS during lancing (MD -4.90, 95% CI -5.73 to -4.07; heterogeneity not applicable; very low-certainty evidence) and during recovery after lancing (MD -3.80, 95% CI -4.47 to -3.13; heterogeneity N/A; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of sucrose + NNS on NFCS scores compared to water + NNS during lancing (MD -0.60, 95% CI -1.47 to 0.27; heterogeneity N/A; very low-certainty evidence). Sucrose vs glucose The evidence suggests that sucrose results in little to no difference in PIPP scores compared to glucose at 30 seconds (MD 0.26, 95% CI -0.70 to 1.22; heterogeneity not applicable; low-certainty evidence) and 60 seconds after lancing (MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.79 to 0.75; heterogeneity N/A; low-certainty evidence). Sucrose vs breastfeeding The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sucrose on PIPP scores compared to breastfeeding at 30 seconds after lancing (MD -0.70, 95% CI -0.49 to 1.88; I2 = 94%; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sucrose on COMFORTneo scores compared to breastfeeding after lancing (MD -2.60, 95% CI -3.06 to -2.14; heterogeneity N/A; very low-certainty evidence). Sucrose vs expressed breast milk The evidence suggests that sucrose may result in little to no difference in PIPP-R scores compared to expressed breast milk during (MD 0.3, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.84; heterogeneity not applicable; low-certainty evidence) and at 30 seconds after lancing (MD 0.3, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.71; heterogeneity N/A; low-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that sucrose probably may result in slightly increased PIPP-R scores compared to expressed breast milk 60 seconds after lancing (MD 1.10, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.86; heterogeneity N/A; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sucrose on DAN scores compared to expressed breast milk 30 seconds after lancing (MD -1.80, 95% CI -8.47 to 4.87; heterogeneity N/A; very low-certainty evidence). Sucrose vs laser acupuncture There was no difference in PIPP-R scores between sucrose and music groups; however, data were reported as medians and IQRs. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sucrose on NIPS scores compared to laser acupuncture during lancing (MD -0.86, 95% CI -1.43 to -0.29; heterogeneity N/A; very low-certainty evidence). Sucrose vs facilitated tucking The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sucrose on total BPSN scores compared to facilitated tucking during lancing (MD -2.27, 95% CI -4.66 to 0.12; heterogeneity N/A; very low-certainty evidence) and during recovery after lancing (MD -0.31, 95% CI -1.72 to 1.10; heterogeneity N/A; very low-certainty evidence). Sucrose vs skin-to-skin + water (repeated lancing) The evidence suggests that sucrose results in little to no difference in PIPP scores compared to skin-to-skin + water at 30 seconds after 1st (MD 0.13, 95% CI -0.70 to 0.96); 2nd (MD -0.56, 95% CI -1.57 to 0.45); or 3rd lancing (MD-0.15, 95% CI -1.26 to 0.96); heterogeneity N/A, low-certainty evidence for all comparisons. The evidence suggests that sucrose results in little to no difference in PIPP scores compared to skin-to-skin + water at 60 seconds after 1st (MD -0.61, 95% CI -1.55 to 0.33); 2nd (MD -0.12, 95% CI -0.99 to 0.75); or 3rd lancing (MD-0.40, 95% CI -1.48 to 0.68); heterogeneity N/A, low-certainty evidence for all comparisons. Minor adverse events required no intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Sucrose compared to control probably results in a reduction of PIPP scores 30 and 60 seconds after single heel lances (moderate-certainty evidence). Evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sucrose compared to NNS, breastfeeding, laser acupuncture, facilitated tucking, and the effect of sucrose + NNS compared to NNS in reducing pain. Sucrose compared to glucose, expressed breast milk, and skin-to-skin care shows little to no difference in pain scores. Sucrose combined with other nonpharmacologic interventions should be used with caution, given the uncertainty of evidence.

Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks-American Pain Society-American Academy of Pain Medicine Pain Taxonomy Diagnostic Criteria for Acute Needle Pain

Needle procedures are among the most common causes of pain and distress for individuals seeking health care. While needle pain is especially problematic for children needle pain and associated fear also has significant impact on adults and can lead to avoidance of appropriate medical care. Currently there is not a standard definition of needle pain. A taxonomy, or classification system, for acute needle pain would aid research efforts and enhance clinical care. To meet this need, the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks public-private partnership with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the American Pain Society, and the American Academy of Pain Medicine formed the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks-American Pain Society-American Academy of Pain Medicine Pain Taxonomy initiative. One of the goals of this initiative was to develop taxonomies for acute pain disorders, including needle pain. To accomplish this, a working group of experts in needle pain was convened. Based on available literature and expert opinion, the working group used a 5-dimenional structure (diagnostic criteria, common features, modulating factors, impact and/or functional consequences, and putative mechanisms) to develop an acute pain taxonomy that is specific needle pain. As part of this, a set of 4 diagnostic criteria, with 2 modifiers to account for the influence of needle associated fear, are proposed to define the types of acute needle pain. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents a taxonomy for acute needle pain. This taxonomy could help to standardize definitions of acute pain in clinical studies of patients undergoing needle procedures.

The Impact of Parental Presence on their Children during Painful Medical Procedures:A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Whether parental presence during their children's painful medical procedures is advantageous with regard to child's pain-related outcomes is questionable. Research regarding this topic is equivocal and additional questions, such as whether levels of parental involvement may play a role as well, remain to be assessed. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize and critically appraise the literature regarding the impact of parental presence versus absence during their children's painful medical procedures on the child's pain-related outcomes.

METHODS

The review protocol was registered on Prospero (ID CRD42018116614). A systematic search in PubMed, Web of Science, and PsycArticles resulted in 22 eligible studies incorporating 2157 participants. Studies were considered eligible if they included children (≤ 18 years old) undergoing a painful medical procedure and compared parental presence and/or involvement with parental absence during the procedure.

RESULTS

The children's pain-related outcomes included self-reported pain intensity, self-reported fear, anxiety and distress, observed pain-related behavior, and physiological parameters. Overall, evidence points in the direction of beneficial effects of parental presence versus absence with regard to children's self-reported pain intensity and physiological parameters, whereas mixed findings were recorded for children's self-reported fears, anxiety and distress, and observed pain-related behaviors.

CONCLUSIONS

: In order to provide clear recommendations on how to involve the parent during the procedure, as well as for which type of children and parents parental presence has the best effects, further research is needed, as indicated in this review.

Nonpharmacologic Management of Pain During Common Needle Puncture Procedures in Infants: Current Research Evidence and Practical Considerations: An Update

Infants undergo painful procedures involving skin puncture as part of routine medical care. Pain from needle puncture procedures is suboptimally managed. Numerous nonpharmacologic interventions are available that may be used for these painful procedures, including swaddling/containment, pacifier/non-nutritive sucking, rocking/holding, breastfeeding and breastmilk, skin-to-skin care, sweet tasting solutions, music therapy, sensorial saturation, and parental presence. Adoption these interventions into routine clinical practice is feasible and should be a standard of care in quality health care for infants. This review summarizes the epidemiology of pain from common needle puncture procedures in infants, the effectiveness of nonpharmacologic interventions, implementation considerations, and unanswered questions.

Sucrose for analgesia in newborn infants undergoing painful procedures

BACKGROUND

Administration of oral sucrose with and without non-nutritive sucking is the most frequently studied non-pharmacological intervention for procedural pain relief in neonates.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy, effect of dose, method of administration and safety of sucrose for relieving procedural pain in neonates as assessed by validated composite pain scores, physiological pain indicators (heart rate, respiratory rate, saturation of peripheral oxygen in the blood, transcutaneous oxygen and carbon dioxide (gas exchange measured across the skin - TcpO2, TcpCO2), near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), electroencephalogram (EEG), or behavioural pain indicators (cry duration, proportion of time crying, proportion of time facial actions (e.g. grimace) are present), or a combination of these and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal. We performed electronic and manual literature searches in February 2016 for published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2016), MEDLINE (1950 to 2016), EMBASE (1980 to 2016), and CINAHL (1982 to 2016). We did not impose language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs in which term or preterm neonates (postnatal age maximum of 28 days after reaching 40 weeks' postmenstrual age), or both, received sucrose for procedural pain. Control interventions included no treatment, water, glucose, breast milk, breastfeeding, local anaesthetic, pacifier, positioning/containing or acupuncture.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Our main outcome measures were composite pain scores (including a combination of behavioural, physiological and contextual indicators). Secondary outcomes included separate physiological and behavioural pain indicators. We reported a mean difference (MD) or weighted MD (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed-effect model for continuous outcome measures. For categorical data we used risk ratio (RR) and risk difference. We assessed heterogeneity by the I(2) test. We assessed the risk of bias of included trials using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE system.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-four studies enrolling 7049 infants were included. Results from only a few studies could be combined in meta-analyses and for most analyses the GRADE assessments indicated low- or moderate-quality evidence. There was high-quality evidence for the beneficial effect of sucrose (24%) with non-nutritive sucking (pacifier dipped in sucrose) or 0.5 mL of sucrose orally in preterm and term infants: Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) 30 s after heel lance WMD -1.70 (95% CI -2.13 to -1.26; I(2) = 0% (no heterogeneity); 3 studies, n = 278); PIPP 60 s after heel lance WMD -2.14 (95% CI -3.34 to -0.94; I(2) = 0% (no heterogeneity; 2 studies, n = 164). There was high-quality evidence for the use of 2 mL 24% sucrose prior to venipuncture: PIPP during venipuncture WMD -2.79 (95% CI -3.76 to -1.83; I(2) = 0% (no heterogeneity; 2 groups in 1 study, n = 213); and intramuscular injections: PIPP during intramuscular injection WMD -1.05 (95% CI -1.98 to -0.12; I(2) = 0% (2 groups in 1 study, n = 232). Evidence from studies that could not be included in RevMan-analyses supported these findings. Reported adverse effects were minor and similar in the sucrose and control groups. Sucrose is not effective in reducing pain from circumcision. The effectiveness of sucrose for reducing pain/stress from other interventions such as arterial puncture, subcutaneous injection, insertion of nasogastric or orogastric tubes, bladder catherization, eye examinations and echocardiography examinations are inconclusive. Most trials indicated some benefit of sucrose use but that the evidence for other painful procedures is of lower quality as it is based on few studies of small sample sizes. The effects of sucrose on long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes are unknown.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Sucrose is effective for reducing procedural pain from single events such as heel lance, venipuncture and intramuscular injection in both preterm and term infants. No serious side effects or harms have been documented with this intervention. We could not identify an optimal dose due to inconsistency in effective sucrose dosage among studies. Further investigation of repeated administration of sucrose in neonates is needed. There is some moderate-quality evidence that sucrose in combination with other non-pharmacological interventions such as non-nutritive sucking is more effective than sucrose alone, but more research of this and sucrose in combination with pharmacological interventions is needed. Sucrose use in extremely preterm, unstable, ventilated (or a combination of these) neonates needs to be addressed. Additional research is needed to determine the minimally effective dose of sucrose during a single painful procedure and the effect of repeated sucrose administration on immediate (pain intensity) and long-term (neurodevelopmental) outcomes.

History of Somatization Is Associated with Prolonged Recovery from Concussion

OBJECTIVE

To determine the association between a history of somatization and prolonged concussion symptoms, including sex differences in recovery.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective cohort study of 10- to 18-year-olds with an acute concussion was conducted from July 2014 to April 2015 at a tertiary care pediatric emergency department. One hundred twenty subjects completed the validated Children's Somatization Inventory (CSI) for pre-injury somatization assessment and Postconcussion Symptoms Scale (PCSS) at diagnosis. PCSS was re-assessed by phone at 2 and 4 weeks. CSI was assessed in quartiles with a generalized estimating equation model to determine relationship of CSI to PCSS over time.

RESULTS

The median age of our study participants was 13.8 years (IQR 11.5, 15.8), 60% male, with separate analyses for each sex. Our model showed a positive interaction between total CSI score, PCSS and time from concussion for females P < .01, and a statistical trend for males, P = .058. Females in the highest quartile of somatization had higher PCSS than the other 3 CSI quartiles at each time point (B -26.7 to -41.1, P values <.015).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with higher pre-injury somatization had higher concussion symptom scores over time. Females in the highest somatization quartile had prolonged concussion recovery with persistently high symptom scores at 4 weeks. Somatization may contribute to sex differences in recovery, and assessment at the time of concussion may help guide management and target therapy.

Oral Sucrose for Pain in Neonates During Echocardiography: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To test the efficacy of oral sucrose in reducing pain/stress during echocardiography as estimated by Premature Infant Pain Profile score.

DESIGN

Double-blind, parallel-group, randomized control trial.

SETTING

Tertiary-care neonatal care unit located in Western India.

PARTICIPANTS

Neonates with established enteral feeding, not on any respiratory support and with gestational age between 32 and 42 weeks requiring echocardiography.

INTERVENTIONS

Neonates in intervention group received oral sucrose prior to echocardiography.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Assessment was done using Premature Infant Pain Profile score.

RESULTS

There were 104 examinations; 52 in each group. Baseline characteristics like mean gestational age (37.6 vs. 37.1), birth weight (2.20 vs. 2.08), and feeding status (Breastfeeding- 59.6% vs. 44.2%, paladai feeding- 13.5% vs. 13.5%, and gavage feeding- 26.9% vs. 42.3%) were comparable. The mean (SD) premature infant pain profile score was significantly higher in control group [(7.4 (3.78) vs. 5.2 (1.92), P <0.001].

CONCLUSION

Oral sucrose significantly reduces pain, and is safe to administer to neonates.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Use of Oral Glucose with or without Gentle Facilitated Tucking of Infants during Neonatal Echocardiography

Objective

To compare the effect of oral glucose given with or without facilitated tucking (FT), versus placebo (water) to facilitate image acquisition during a targeted neonatal echocardiography (TNE).

Design

Factorial, double blind, randomized controlled trial.

Setting

Tertiary neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

Patients

Infants born between 26 and 42 weeks of gestation (GA).

Interventions

One of four treatment groups: oral water (placebo), oral glucose (25%), facilitated tucking with oral water or facilitated tucking with oral glucose, during a single, structured TNE. All infants received a soother.

Main Outcome Measure

Change in Behavioral Indicators of Infant Pain (BIIP) scores.

Results

104 preterm infants were randomized (mean ± SD GA: 33.4 ± 3.5 weeks). BIIP scores remained low during the echocardiography scan (median, [IQ range]: 0, [0 to 1]). There were no differences in the level of agitation of infants amongst the treatment groups, with estimated reductions in mean BIIP relative to control of 0.27 (95%CI -0.40 to 0.94) with use of oral glucose and .04 (-0.63 to 0.70) with facilitated tucking. There were also no differences between treatment groups in the quality and duration of the echocardiography scans.

Conclusions

In stable infants in the NICU, a TNE can be performed with minimal disruption in a majority of cases, simply by providing a soother. The use of 25% glucose water in this context did not provide further benefit in reducing agitation and improving image acquisition.

Clinical Trial Registration

Clinical Trials.gov: NCT01253889

Sweet tasting solutions for reduction of needle-related procedural pain in children aged one to 16 years

BACKGROUND

Extensive evidence exists showing analgesic effects of sweet solutions for newborns and infants. It is less certain if the same analgesic effects exist for children one year to 16 years of age. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 10, 2011 (Harrison 2011) titled Sweet tasting solutions for reduction of needle-related procedural pain in children aged one to 16 years.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of sweet tasting solutions or substances for reducing needle-related procedural pain in children beyond one year of age.

SEARCH METHODS

Searches were run to the end of June 2014. We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and ACP Journal Club (all via OvidSP), and CINAH (via EBSCOhost). We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCT) in which children aged one year to 16 years, received a sweet tasting solution or substance for needle-related procedural pain. Control conditions included water, non-sweet tasting substances, pacifier, distraction, positioning/containment, breastfeeding, or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Outcome measures included crying duration, composite pain scores, physiological or behavioral pain indicators, self-report of pain or parental or healthcare professional-report of the child's pain. We reported mean differences (MD), weighted mean difference (WMD), or standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using fixed-effect or random-effects models as appropriate for continuous outcome measures. We reported risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), and the number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) for dichotomous outcomes. We used the I(2) statistic to assess between-study heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included one unpublished and seven published studies (total of 808 participants); four more studies and 478 more participants than the 2011 review. Six trials included young children aged one to four years receiving sucrose or candy lollypops for immunisation pain compared with water or no treatment. Usual care included topical anaesthetics, upright parental holding, and distraction. All studies were well designed blinded RCTs, however, five of the six studies had a high risk of bias based on small sample sizes.Two studies included school-aged children receiving sweet or unsweetened chewing gum before, or before and during, immunisation and blood collection. Both studies, conducted by the same author, had a high risk of bias based on small sample sizes.Results for the toddlers/pre-school children were conflicting. Duration of cry, using a random-effects model, was not significantly reduced by sweet taste (six trials, 520 children, WMD -15 seconds, 95% CI -54 to 24, I(2) = 94%).Composite pain score at time of first needle was reported in four studies (n = 121 children). The scores were not significantly different between the sucrose and control group (SMD -0.26, 95% CI -1.27 to 0.75, I(2) = 86%).A Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale score > 4 was significantly less common in the sucrose group compared to the control group in one study (n = 472, RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.67; RD -0.29, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.20; NNTB 3, 95% CI 3 to 5; tests for heterogeneity not applicable.For school-aged children, chewing sweet gum before needle-related painful procedures (two studies, n = 111 children) or during the procedures (two studies, n = 103 children) did not significantly reduce pain scores. A comparison of the Faces Pain Scale scores in children chewing sweet gum before the procedures compared with scores of children chewing unsweetened gum revealed a WMD of -0.15 (95% CI -0.61 to 0.30). Similar results were found when comparing the chewing of sweet gum with unsweetened gum during the procedure (WMD 0.23, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.74). The Colored Analogue Scale for children chewing sweet gum compared to unsweetened gum before the procedure was not significantly different (WMD 0.24 (-0.69 to 1.18)) nor was it different when children chewed the gum during the procedure (WMD 0.86 (95% CI -0.12 to 1.83)). There was no heterogeneity for any of these analyses in school-aged children (I(2) = 0%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the eight studies included in this systematic review update, two of which were subgroups of small numbers of eligible toddlers from larger studies, and three of which were pilot RCTs with small numbers of participants, there is insufficient evidence of the analgesic effects of sweet tasting solutions or substances during acutely painful procedures in young children between one and four years of age. Further rigorously conducted, adequately powered RCTs are warranted in this population. Based on the two studies by the same author, there was no evidence of analgesic effects of sweet taste in school-aged children. As there are other effective evidence-based strategies available to use in this age group, further trials are not warranted.Despite the addition of four studies in this review, conclusions have not changed since the last version of the review.

Sucrose for analgesia in newborn infants undergoing painful procedures

BACKGROUND

Administration of oral sucrose with and without non-nutritive sucking is the most frequently studied non-pharmacological intervention for procedural pain relief in neonates.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy, effect of dose and safety of oral sucrose for relieving procedural pain in neonates.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. Electronic and manual searches were performed in November 2011 for published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in MEDLINE (1950 to November 2011), EMBASE (1980 to 2011), CINAHL (1982 to November 2011) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library). We did not impose language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs in which term, preterm, or both term and preterm neonates (postnatal age maximum of 28 days after reaching 40 weeks' postmenstrual age) received sucrose for procedural pain. Control conditions included no treatment, water, pacifier, positioning/containing or breastfeeding.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Main outcome measures were physiological, behavioural, or both pain indicators with or without composite pain scores. A mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed-effect model was reported for continuous outcome measures. Trial quality was assessed as per The Cochrane Collaboration

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-seven studies enrolling 4730 infants were included. Results from only a few studies could be combined in meta-analyses. When Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) scores were pooled, sucrose groups had significantly lower scores at 30 seconds (weighted mean difference (WMD) -1.76; 95% CI -2.54 to - 0.97; 4 trials; 264 neonates] and 60 seconds (WMD -2.05; 95% CI -3.08 to -1.02; 3 trials' 195 neonates) post-heel lance. For retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) examinations, sucrose did not significantly reduce PIPP scores (WMD -0.65; 95% CI -1.88 to 0.59; 3 trials; 82 neonates). There were no differences in adverse effects between sucrose and control groups. Sucrose significantly reduced duration of total crying time (WMD -39 seconds; 95% CI -44 to -34; 2 trials; 88 neonates), but did not reduce duration of first cry during heel lance (WMD -9 seconds; 95% CI -20 to 2; 3 trials; 192 neonates). Oxygen saturation (%) was significantly lower in infants given sucrose during ROP examination compared to controls (WMD -2.6; 95% CI -4.9 to - 0.2; 2 trials; 62 neonates). Results of individual trials that could not be incorporated in meta-analyses supported these findings. The effects of sucrose on long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes are unknown.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Sucrose is safe and effective for reducing procedural pain from single events. An optimal dose could not be identified due to inconsistency in effective sucrose dosage among studies. Further investigation on repeated administration of sucrose in neonates and the use of sucrose in combination with other non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions is needed. Sucrose use in extremely preterm, unstable, ventilated (or a combination of these) neonates needs to be addressed. Additional research is needed to determine the minimally effective dose of sucrose during a single painful procedure and the effect of repeated sucrose administration on immediate (pain intensity) and long-term (neurodevelopmental) outcomes.

Relief of pain and anxiety in pediatric patients in emergency medical systems

Control of pain and stress for children is a vital component of emergency medical care. Timely administration of analgesia affects the entire emergency medical experience and can have a lasting effect on a child's and family's reaction to current and future medical care. A systematic approach to pain management and anxiolysis, including staff education and protocol development, can provide comfort to children in the emergency setting and improve staff and family satisfaction.

Sucrose for procedural pain management in infants

The use of oral sucrose has been the most extensively studied pain intervention in newborn care to date. More than 150 published studies relating to sweet-taste-induced calming and analgesia in human infants have been identified, of which 100 (65%) include sucrose. With only a few exceptions, sucrose, glucose, or other sweet solutions reduced pain responses during commonly performed painful procedures in diverse populations of infants up to 12 months of age. Sucrose has been widely recommended for routine use during painful procedures in newborn and young infants, yet these recommendations have not been translated into consistent use in clinical practice. One reason may be related to important knowledge and research gaps concerning analgesic effects of sucrose. Notably, the mechanism of sweet-taste-induced analgesia is still not precisely understood, which has implications for using research evidence in practice. The aim of this article is to review what is known about the mechanisms of sucrose-induced analgesia; highlight existing evidence, knowledge gaps, and current controversies; and provide directions for future research and practice.

Sweet taste and chorda tympani transection alter capsaicin-induced lingual pain perception in adult human subjects

Sweetness signals the nutritional value of food and may moreover be accompanied by a sensory suppression that leads to higher pain tolerance. This effect is well documented in infant rats and humans. However, it is still debated whether sensory suppression is also present in adult humans. Thus, we investigated the effects of sweet taste on the perception of the painful trigeminal stimulus capsaicin in two groups of healthy adult human subjects. A solution of 100 μM capsaicin was applied to the tip of the subject's tongues in order to stimulate trigeminal Aδ- and C-fiber nociceptors. When swallowed, 1M sucrose reduced the capsaicin-induced burning sensation by 29% (p ≤ 0.05) whereas a solution of similar taste intensity containing 1 μM quinine did not. Similarly, sucrose application to the frontal hemitongue suppressed the perception of the burning sensation induced by contralaterally applied capsaicin by 25% (p ≤ 0.01). We furthermore investigated the effects of documented unilateral transection of the chorda tympani nerve on capsaicin perception. In accordance with the ipsi-to-contralateral effect of sucrose on capsaicin perception in healthy subjects, hemiageusic subjects were more sensitive for capsaicin on the tongue contralateral to the taste nerve lesion (+38%; p ≤ 0.01). Taken together, these results argue I) for the existence of food intake-induced sensory suppression, if not analgesia, in adult humans and II) a centrally mediated suppression of trigeminal sensation by taste inputs that III) becomes disinhibited upon peripheral taste nerve lesion.

Hospitalized infants who hurt: a sweet solution with oral sucrose

Pain is harmful to newborn infants. Oral sucrose is safe, inexpensive, and effective at preventing and reducing pain in hospitalized babies who undergo invasive procedures. The sugar can be used alone or in combination with analgesics and other nonpharmacological interventions to provide analgesia. Parents expect nurses to serve as pain advocates for the parents' newborns and to protect the babies from needless suffering. It is incumbent upon nurses to stay abreast of the current evidence and integrate use of oral sucrose into daily pain management practice in emergency, acute, and critical care units.

Paediatric MRI under sedation: is it necessary? What is the evidence for the alternatives?

To achieve diagnostic images during MRI examinations, small children need to lie still to avoid movement artefact. To reduce patient motion, obviate the need for voluntary immobilisation or breath-holding and therefore obtain high-quality images, MRI of infants is frequently carried out under sedation or general anaesthesia, but this is not without risk and expense. However, many other techniques are available for preparing children for MRI, which have not been fully evaluated. Here, we evaluate the advantages and disadvantage of sedation and anaesthesia for MRI. We then evaluate the alternatives, which include neonatal comforting techniques, sleep manipulation, and appropriate adaptation of the physical environment. We summarize the evidence for their use according to an established hierarchy. Lastly, we discuss several factors that will influence the choice of imaging preparation, including patient factors, imaging factors and service provision. The choice of approach to paediatric MRI is multi-factorial, with limited scientific evidence for many of the current approaches. These considerations may enable others to image children using MRI under different circumstances.

Sweet tasting solutions for reduction of needle-related procedural pain in children aged one to 16 years

BACKGROUND

Large numbers of studies have shown that oral sucrose or glucose, with or without non-nutritive sucking given prior to painful procedures result in a significant reduction in behavioral pain responses during or following painful procedures compared with placebo, no treatment or non-nutritive sucking alone, in newborns and infants up to 12 months of age. It is not known if these pain-reducing effects exist for older infants and children one year to 16 years of age.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of sweet tasting solutions or substances for reducing needle-related procedural pain in children beyond one year of age.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CCTR), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ACP Journal Club, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and on the EBSCOhost interface: CINAHL. We applied no language or document type restrictions. We used the standard methods of The Cochrane Collaboration. The last date of the search was June 30, 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which children from one year up to 16 years of age, received a sweet tasting solution or substance for needle-related procedural pain. Control conditions included water, non-sweet tasting substances, pacifier, distraction, no treatment, positioning/containment or breastfeeding.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Outcome measures included composite pain scores, physiological or behavioral pain indicators, self-report of pain or parental- or healthcare professional-report of child's pain. We reported mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using fixed-effect or random-effects models as appropriate for continuous outcome measures. We planned to report risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD) for dichotomous outcomes. We used the Chi(2) test and I(2) statistic to assess between-study heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies (330 participants). Two studies focused on toddlers and pre-school children receiving sucrose for immunization pain compared with water or no treatment and two studies included school-aged children receiving sweet or unsweetened chewing gum before, or, before and during immunization and blood collection. Results for the toddlers/pre-school children were conflicting. Participants in the sucrose group in one study had significantly lower cry duration and behavioral pain scores, compared with the no intervention group, while crying time did not differ between the sucrose and the no intervention group in the other study. For school-aged children, chewing sweet gum either before, or during the procedure, did not significantly reduce pain scores.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on these four studies, two of which were subgroups of small numbers of eligible toddlers from larger studies, there is insufficient evidence of the analgesic effects of sweet tasting solutions or substances during acute painful procedures in children over one year of age. Further well-conducted RCTs are warranted in this population.

Oral sucrose as an analgesic drug for procedural pain in newborn infants: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Many infants admitted to hospital undergo repeated invasive procedures. Oral sucrose is frequently given to relieve procedural pain in neonates on the basis of its effect on behavioural and physiological pain scores. We assessed whether sucrose administration reduces pain-specific brain and spinal cord activity after an acute noxious procedure in newborn infants.

METHODS

In this double-blind, randomised controlled trial, 59 newborn infants at University College Hospital (London, UK) were randomly assigned to receive 0·5 mL 24% sucrose solution or 0·5 mL sterile water 2 min before undergoing a clinically required heel lance. Randomisation was by a computer-generated randomisation code, and researchers, clinicians, participants, and parents were masked to the identity of the solutions. The primary outcome was pain-specific brain activity evoked by one time-locked heel lance, recorded with electroencephalography and identified by principal component analysis. Secondary measures were baseline behavioural and physiological measures, observational pain scores (PIPP), and spinal nociceptive reflex withdrawal activity. Data were analysed per protocol. This study is registered, number ISRCTN78390996.

FINDINGS

29 infants were assigned to receive sucrose and 30 to sterilised water; 20 and 24 infants, respectively, were included in the analysis of the primary outcome measure. Nociceptive brain activity after the noxious heel lance did not differ significantly between infants who received sucrose and those who received sterile water (sucrose: mean 0·10, 95% CI 0·04-0·16; sterile water: mean 0·08, 0·04-0·12; p=0·46). No significant difference was recorded between the sucrose and sterile water groups in the magnitude or latency of the spinal nociceptive reflex withdrawal recorded from the biceps femoris of the stimulated leg. The PIPP score was significantly lower in infants given sucrose than in those given sterile water (mean 5·8, 95% CI 3·7-7·8 vs 8·5, 7·3-9·8; p=0·02) and significantly more infants had no change in facial expression after sucrose administration (seven of 20 [35%] vs none of 24; p<0·0001).

INTERPRETATION

Our data suggest that oral sucrose does not significantly affect activity in neonatal brain or spinal cord nociceptive circuits, and therefore might not be an effective analgesic drug. The ability of sucrose to reduce clinical observational scores after noxious events in newborn infants should not be interpreted as pain relief.

FUNDING

Medical Research Council.

NICU procedures are getting sweeter: development of a sucrose protocol for neonatal procedural pain

Neonates in the neonatal intensive care nursery experience multiple, painful, tissue-damaging procedures daily. Pain among neonates is often underestimated and untreated, producing untoward consequences. A literature review established strong evidence supporting the use of sucrose as an analgesic for minor procedural pain among neonates. A review of unit practices and nurses' experiential evidence initiated the production of a standardized protocol in our unit at the University of Washington Medical Center NICU in Seattle.Nursing practices surrounding sucrose use differed widely in dose, timing, and patient application. We carefully evaluated evidence documenting the effectiveness as well as the safety of sucrose administration and wrote a protocol and practice standards for our primarily premature patient population. This article describes the development and execution of a standardized, nurse-implemented, sucrose protocol to reduce procedural pain.

Sucrose for analgesia in newborn infants undergoing painful procedures

BACKGROUND

Administration of oral sucrose with and without non-nutritive sucking is frequently used as a non-pharmacological intervention for procedural pain relief in neonates.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy, effect of dose and safety of oral sucrose for relieving procedural pain in neonates.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Collaborative Review Group were used.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials in which term and/or preterm neonates (postnatal age maximum of 28 days corrected for postmenstrual age) received sucrose for procedural pain. Control conditions included water, pacifier, positioning/containing or breastfeeding.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The main outcome measures were physiological and/or behavioural pain indicators and/or composite pain scores. A weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed effects model was reported for continuous outcome measures.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-four studies enrolling 3,496 infants were included. Results from only a few studies could be combined in meta-analyses. Sucrose significantly reduced duration of total crying time (seconds) [WMD -39.26 (95% CI -44.29, -34.24), 88 neonates], but did not reduce duration of first cry (seconds) during heel lance [WMD -8.99 (95% CI -20.07, 2.10), 192 neonates]. No significant differences were found for percent change in heart rate from baseline at one minute [WMD 0.90 (95% CI -5.81, 7.61), 86 neonates] and three minutes [WMD -6.20 (95% CI -15.27, 2.88), 86 neonates] post-heel lance, or for mean heart rate at three minutes post-heel lance [WMD -0.98 (95% CI -8.29, 6.32), 154 neonates]. Oxygen saturation (%) was significantly lower in infants given sucrose during ROP examination compared to controls [WMD -2.58 (95% CI -4.94, - 0.23), 62 neonates]. Infants given sucrose post-heel lance had significantly lower PIPP scores at 30 seconds [WMD -1.64 (95% CI -2.47, - 0.81), 220 neonates] and 60 seconds [WMD -2.05 (95% CI -3.08, -1.02), 195 neonates]. For ROP exams, sucrose did not significantly reduce PIPP scores [WMD -0.65 (95% CI -1.88, 0.59), 82 neonates]. There were no differences in adverse effects between sucrose and control groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Sucrose is safe and effective for reducing procedural pain from single events. An optimal dose could not be identified due to inconsistency in effective sucrose dosage among studies.Further investigation on repeated administration of sucrose in neonates and the use of sucrose in combination with other non-pharmacological (e.g. behavioural, physical) and pharmacologic interventions is needed. Sucrose use in extremely low birth-weight and unstable and/or ventilated neonates needs to be addressed.

Influence of repeated painful procedures and sucrose analgesia on the development of hyperalgesia in newborn infants

This study determined the effects of cumulative exposure to painful needle procedures and sucrose analgesia on the development of remote hyperalgesia in newborn infants, defined as an increase in response to a normally painful stimulus at a site distal from the site of injury. One-hundred and twenty healthy newborns and 120 healthy newborn infants of diabetic mothers equally randomized to sucrose analgesia or placebo prior to all needle procedures in the first two days after birth were divided into two exposure groups according to number of needle procedures they had undergone [high (> or =5) or low (< or =4)] using the median cut-off technique. Compared to the low exposure group, infants in the high exposure group had a higher pain response during a subsequent venipuncture distal to the site of previous injury, assessed by the Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) [7.1 vs. 8.4; p=0.012] and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [2.5 cm vs. 3.2 cm; p=0.047], and a trend for longer cry duration [25.7 s vs. 33.8 s; p=0.171]. PIPP scores did not differ during a routine diaper change, suggesting a nociceptive specific mechanism for the remote hyperalgesia to venipuncture. Sucrose reduced PIPP, VAS, and cry duration scores during venipuncture, but did not prevent hyperalgesia (p>0.05). There was a preponderance of infants of diabetic mothers in the high exposure group; however, the analysis did not demonstrate this to be a confounding factor. In conclusion, sucrose analgesia for repeated painful procedures in the first day of life does not prevent development of remote hyperalgesia in newborns.