Cochrane Review: Non‐pharmacological management of infant and young child procedural pain
Background Infant acute pain and distress is commonplace. Infancy is a period of exponential development. Unrelieved pain and distress can have implications across the lifespan. Objectives To assess the efficacy of non‐pharmacological interventions for infant and child (up to three years) acute pain...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Evidence-based child health 2012-11, Vol.7 (6), p.1905-2121 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background
Infant acute pain and distress is commonplace. Infancy is a period of exponential development. Unrelieved pain and distress can have implications across the lifespan.
Objectives
To assess the efficacy of non‐pharmacological interventions for infant and child (up to three years) acute pain, excluding breastmilk, sucrose, and music. Analyses accounted for infant age (preterm, neonate, older) and pain response (pain reactivity, pain‐related regulation).
Search methods
We searched CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library (2011, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2011), EMBASE (1980 to April 2011), PsycINFO (1967 to April 2011), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (1982 to 2011), Dissertation s International (1980 to 2011) and www.clinicaltrials.gov. We also searched reference lists and contacted researchers via electronic list‐serves.
Selection criteria
Participants included infants from birth to three years. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or RCT cross‐overs that had a no‐treatment control comparison were eligible for inclusion in the analyses. We examined studies that met all inclusion criteria except for study design (e.g. had an active control) to qualitatively contextualize results.
Data collection and analysis
We refined search strategies with three Cochrane‐affiliated librarians. At least two review authors extracted and rated 51 articles. Study quality ratings were based on a scale by Yates and colleagues. We analyzed the standardized mean difference (SMD) using the generic inverse variance method. We also provided qualitative descriptions of 20 relevant but excluded studies.
Main results
Fifty‐one studies, with 3396 participants, were analyzed. The most commonly studied acute procedures were heel‐sticks (29 studies) and needles (n = 10 studies). The largest SMD for treatment improvement over control conditions on pain reactivity were: non‐nutritive sucking‐related interventions (preterm: SMD ‐0.42; 95% CI ‐0.68 to ‐0.15; neonate: SMD ‐1.45, 95% CI ‐2.34 to ‐0.57), kangaroo care (preterm: SMD ‐1.12, 95% CI ‐2.04 to ‐0.21), and swaddling/facilitated tucking (preterm: SMD ‐0.97; 95% CI ‐1.63 to ‐0.31). For immediate pain‐related regulation, the largest SMDs were: non‐nutritive sucking‐related interventions (preterm: SMD ‐0.38; 95% CI ‐0.59 to ‐0.17; neonate: SMD ‐0.90, 95% CI ‐1.54 to ‐0.25), kangaroo care (SMD ‐0.77, 95% CI ‐1.50 to ‐0.03), swaddling/facilitated tucking (preterm: SMD ‐0.75; 95% CI ‐1.14 to ‐0.36), and rocki |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1557-6272 2040-4050 1557-6272 |
DOI: | 10.1002/ebch.1883 |