Intensive interdisciplinary pain treatment (IIPT) involves multiple stakeholders. Mapping the program components to its anticipated outcomes (ie, its theory) can be difficult and requires stakeholder engagement. Evidence is lacking, however, on how best to engage them. Logic analysis, a theory‐based evaluation, that tests the coherence of a program theory using scientific evidence and experiential knowledge may hold some promise. Its use is rare in pediatric pain interventions, and few methodological details are available. This article provides a description of a collaborative logic analysis methodology used to test the theoretical plausibility of an IIPT designed for youth with pain‐related disability. A 3‐step direct logic analysis process was used. A 13‐member expert panel, composed of clinicians, teachers, managers, youth with pain‐related disability, and their parents, were engaged in each step. First, a logic model was constructed through document analysis, expert panel surveys, and focus‐group discussions. Then, a scoping review, focused on pediatric self‐management, building self‐efficacy, and fostering participation, helped create a conceptual framework. An examination of the logic model against the conceptual framework by the expert panel followed, and recommendations were formulated. Overall, the collaborative logic analysis process helped raiseawareness of clinicians’ assumptions about the program causal mechanisms, identified program components most valued by youth and their parents, recognized the program features supported by scientific and experiential knowledge, detected gaps, and highlighted emerging trends. In addition to providing a consumer‐focused program evaluation option, collaborative logic analysis methodology holds promise as a strategy to engage stakeholders and to translate pediatric pain rehabilitation evaluation research knowledge to key stakeholders.
{"title":"Using collaborative logic analysis evaluation to test the program theory of an intensive interdisciplinary pain treatment for youth with pain‐related disability","authors":"Karen Hurtubise, A. Brousselle, C. Camden","doi":"10.1002/pne2.12018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pne2.12018","url":null,"abstract":"Intensive interdisciplinary pain treatment (IIPT) involves multiple stakeholders. Mapping the program components to its anticipated outcomes (ie, its theory) can be difficult and requires stakeholder engagement. Evidence is lacking, however, on how best to engage them. Logic analysis, a theory‐based evaluation, that tests the coherence of a program theory using scientific evidence and experiential knowledge may hold some promise. Its use is rare in pediatric pain interventions, and few methodological details are available. This article provides a description of a collaborative logic analysis methodology used to test the theoretical plausibility of an IIPT designed for youth with pain‐related disability. A 3‐step direct logic analysis process was used. A 13‐member expert panel, composed of clinicians, teachers, managers, youth with pain‐related disability, and their parents, were engaged in each step. First, a logic model was constructed through document analysis, expert panel surveys, and focus‐group discussions. Then, a scoping review, focused on pediatric self‐management, building self‐efficacy, and fostering participation, helped create a conceptual framework. An examination of the logic model against the conceptual framework by the expert panel followed, and recommendations were formulated. Overall, the collaborative logic analysis process helped raiseawareness of clinicians’ assumptions about the program causal mechanisms, identified program components most valued by youth and their parents, recognized the program features supported by scientific and experiential knowledge, detected gaps, and highlighted emerging trends. In addition to providing a consumer‐focused program evaluation option, collaborative logic analysis methodology holds promise as a strategy to engage stakeholders and to translate pediatric pain rehabilitation evaluation research knowledge to key stakeholders.","PeriodicalId":19634,"journal":{"name":"Paediatric & Neonatal Pain","volume":"25 1","pages":"113 - 130"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78222017","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Lara M. Genik, C. McMurtry, P. Barata, C. Barney, Stephen P. Lewis
Pain is common and complex for children with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD). Secondary caregivers such as respite workers are lacking important pain‐related information which can impact care. Here, we outline a randomized controlled trial (RCT) protocol testing the effectiveness of a pain training for respite workers supporting children with I/DD.
{"title":"Study protocol for a multi‐centre parallel two‐group randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness and impact of a pain assessment and management program for respite workers supporting children with disabilities","authors":"Lara M. Genik, C. McMurtry, P. Barata, C. Barney, Stephen P. Lewis","doi":"10.1002/pne2.12014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pne2.12014","url":null,"abstract":"Pain is common and complex for children with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD). Secondary caregivers such as respite workers are lacking important pain‐related information which can impact care. Here, we outline a randomized controlled trial (RCT) protocol testing the effectiveness of a pain training for respite workers supporting children with I/DD.","PeriodicalId":19634,"journal":{"name":"Paediatric & Neonatal Pain","volume":"38 1","pages":"7 - 13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85871902","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In children with chronic pain conditions, the acute pain and anxiety induced by routine procedures such as dressing changes, phlebotomy, and lumbar punctures may be amplified compared to that experienced by healthy children. However, sedatives and opiates may be contraindicated if respiratory depression is a concern. In this case report, we describe a 17‐year‐old male with ischemic priapism secondary to sickle cell disease in whom we used virtual reality immersion as a distraction method during epidural catheter placement. No sedation or analgesia was needed, and the patient reported no pain or distress.
{"title":"Use of virtual reality for epidural placement in an adolescent with ischemic priapism","authors":"Zvonimir Bebic, J. Thomas","doi":"10.1002/pne2.12021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pne2.12021","url":null,"abstract":"In children with chronic pain conditions, the acute pain and anxiety induced by routine procedures such as dressing changes, phlebotomy, and lumbar punctures may be amplified compared to that experienced by healthy children. However, sedatives and opiates may be contraindicated if respiratory depression is a concern. In this case report, we describe a 17‐year‐old male with ischemic priapism secondary to sickle cell disease in whom we used virtual reality immersion as a distraction method during epidural catheter placement. No sedation or analgesia was needed, and the patient reported no pain or distress.","PeriodicalId":19634,"journal":{"name":"Paediatric & Neonatal Pain","volume":"1 1","pages":"16 - 17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76626927","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The development of palatable and acceptable analgesics for children is a major challenge. Given the majority of medications are administered orally, and children are more sensitive to and less tolerant of bitterness, novel “child‐friendly” preparations need to be developed and tested specifically in this patient population. This study investigated the palatability and acceptability of a therapeutic dose of ibuprofen in the form of soft chewable capsules in 100 healthy children aged 7‐12 years of age and the acceptability of this novel preparation to their caregivers. About 97% of children adhered to a full therapeutic age‐related dose, with 72% of these participants rating the preparation as acceptable on a hedonic facial scale. Despite 22% of children noting a “hot, spicy, or burning” sensation, consistent with known chemesthetic effects of ibuprofen, 83% of children confirmed they would take the medication in future, which rose to 87% in the context of future illness. In addition, after observing their children ingesting the medication, 92% of parents/guardians confirmed that they would be happy to administer this preparation of ibuprofen to their child if they were unwell. In conclusion, ibuprofen administered in the form of soft chewable capsules was palatable and acceptable to the majority of children and their parents/guardians and may provide a convenient and easy to dose preparation to reduce fever and relieve pain in children.
{"title":"A chewable pediatric preparation of ibuprofen is palatable and acceptable to children","authors":"S. Barnett, A. Bhatt","doi":"10.1002/pne2.12013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pne2.12013","url":null,"abstract":"The development of palatable and acceptable analgesics for children is a major challenge. Given the majority of medications are administered orally, and children are more sensitive to and less tolerant of bitterness, novel “child‐friendly” preparations need to be developed and tested specifically in this patient population. This study investigated the palatability and acceptability of a therapeutic dose of ibuprofen in the form of soft chewable capsules in 100 healthy children aged 7‐12 years of age and the acceptability of this novel preparation to their caregivers. About 97% of children adhered to a full therapeutic age‐related dose, with 72% of these participants rating the preparation as acceptable on a hedonic facial scale. Despite 22% of children noting a “hot, spicy, or burning” sensation, consistent with known chemesthetic effects of ibuprofen, 83% of children confirmed they would take the medication in future, which rose to 87% in the context of future illness. In addition, after observing their children ingesting the medication, 92% of parents/guardians confirmed that they would be happy to administer this preparation of ibuprofen to their child if they were unwell. In conclusion, ibuprofen administered in the form of soft chewable capsules was palatable and acceptable to the majority of children and their parents/guardians and may provide a convenient and easy to dose preparation to reduce fever and relieve pain in children.","PeriodicalId":19634,"journal":{"name":"Paediatric & Neonatal Pain","volume":"14 1","pages":"2 - 6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73503602","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Neonatal pain researchers in British Columbia, Canada, have designed a “robot” to help babies delivered preterm to cope with painful procedures by mimicking skin-to-skin contact with a parent.1 A picture of this device with an infant in prone position resting on this appliance was displayed in one of the many cutting-edge lectures at the excellent and well-organized 12th International Symposium on Pediatric Pain in Basel in June. This “substitute parent-device,” shaped like a rectangular platform, fits inside an incubator and is programmed with information on the parent's heartbeat and breathing motions, simulating skin-to-skin contact with a parent who may not be available during around-the-clock procedures in a neonatal intensive care unit. In Florida, USA, to assist preterm born infants requiring care in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) to eat more efficiently and increase weight gain, music medicine researchers have invented a device to enhance suck effectiveness.2 The device is a pacifier that can detect whether a baby is sucking on it, and in turn, the baby gets to hear a lullaby as an auditory input in direct response to effective sucking. The music is prerecorded and consists of instrumental lullabies or songs sung by the parent. Devices such as the ones identified have good intentions and promising results in research studies.1-3 These substitutes are also said to save millions of dollars in staffing costs and shorten hospital stays.4 However, devices like these fail to acknowledge the needs of the whole family. Given the high incidence of maternal depression, family stress, and elevated incidence of post-traumatic stress in NICU parents, the benefits and cost-effectiveness derived with active parental participation in care are overlooked with these approaches.5,6 The hospitalized infant has an innate need for experiencing contingent and reciprocal interactions with a loving and affectionate parent. Similarly, parents have a need to fulfill their protective role. Separation and ruptures in the processes and functions linked to attachment, for example, related to painful procedures, may have long-term negative effects.7 The researchers in Canada emphasize in their study that parents should always be the first choice.1 Why then, develop devices that we know will deprive the infant of optimal and efficacious pain alleviation and development,5 including threatening parents’ mental well-being? What if the hospital boards find these devices more convenient and less expensive in the neonatal care than trying to change societal structures in the healthcare system and rebuild hospitals to welcome parents around the clock? More and more research emphasizes the importance of parents as mediators for pain relief.8-11 Parents are an underused resource in pain management, but they are highly motivated to participate in their infant's pain care.12 Pain management should be considered a reciprocal continuation where both parent and infant can lea
{"title":"O Parent, Where Art Thou?","authors":"Alexandra Ullsten, M. Eriksson, A. Axelin","doi":"10.1002/pne2.12010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pne2.12010","url":null,"abstract":"Neonatal pain researchers in British Columbia, Canada, have designed a “robot” to help babies delivered preterm to cope with painful procedures by mimicking skin-to-skin contact with a parent.1 A picture of this device with an infant in prone position resting on this appliance was displayed in one of the many cutting-edge lectures at the excellent and well-organized 12th International Symposium on Pediatric Pain in Basel in June. This “substitute parent-device,” shaped like a rectangular platform, fits inside an incubator and is programmed with information on the parent's heartbeat and breathing motions, simulating skin-to-skin contact with a parent who may not be available during around-the-clock procedures in a neonatal intensive care unit. In Florida, USA, to assist preterm born infants requiring care in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) to eat more efficiently and increase weight gain, music medicine researchers have invented a device to enhance suck effectiveness.2 The device is a pacifier that can detect whether a baby is sucking on it, and in turn, the baby gets to hear a lullaby as an auditory input in direct response to effective sucking. The music is prerecorded and consists of instrumental lullabies or songs sung by the parent. Devices such as the ones identified have good intentions and promising results in research studies.1-3 These substitutes are also said to save millions of dollars in staffing costs and shorten hospital stays.4 However, devices like these fail to acknowledge the needs of the whole family. Given the high incidence of maternal depression, family stress, and elevated incidence of post-traumatic stress in NICU parents, the benefits and cost-effectiveness derived with active parental participation in care are overlooked with these approaches.5,6 The hospitalized infant has an innate need for experiencing contingent and reciprocal interactions with a loving and affectionate parent. Similarly, parents have a need to fulfill their protective role. Separation and ruptures in the processes and functions linked to attachment, for example, related to painful procedures, may have long-term negative effects.7 The researchers in Canada emphasize in their study that parents should always be the first choice.1 Why then, develop devices that we know will deprive the infant of optimal and efficacious pain alleviation and development,5 including threatening parents’ mental well-being? What if the hospital boards find these devices more convenient and less expensive in the neonatal care than trying to change societal structures in the healthcare system and rebuild hospitals to welcome parents around the clock? More and more research emphasizes the importance of parents as mediators for pain relief.8-11 Parents are an underused resource in pain management, but they are highly motivated to participate in their infant's pain care.12 Pain management should be considered a reciprocal continuation where both parent and infant can lea","PeriodicalId":19634,"journal":{"name":"Paediatric & Neonatal Pain","volume":"41 1","pages":"53 - 55"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74269525","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
P. Duong, M. Tauzin, F. Decobert, L. Marchand, L. Caeymaex, X. Durrmeyer
Continuous intravenous (IV) morphine is commonly used in ventilated neonates. Oral route is theoretically feasible but data on oral morphine in ventilated premature infants are lacking.
持续静脉注射吗啡常用于通气新生儿。口服吗啡在理论上是可行的，但缺乏通气早产儿口服吗啡的数据。
{"title":"Continuous intravenous to oral morphine switch in very premature ventilated infants: A retrospective study on efficacy, efficiency, and tolerability","authors":"P. Duong, M. Tauzin, F. Decobert, L. Marchand, L. Caeymaex, X. Durrmeyer","doi":"10.1002/pne2.12011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pne2.12011","url":null,"abstract":"Continuous intravenous (IV) morphine is commonly used in ventilated neonates. Oral route is theoretically feasible but data on oral morphine in ventilated premature infants are lacking.","PeriodicalId":19634,"journal":{"name":"Paediatric & Neonatal Pain","volume":"8 1","pages":"45 - 52"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85335386","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Afshin A Taleghani, B. Isemann, Ward Rice, Laura P Ward, K. Wedig, H. Akinbi
We aimed to compare the outcomes of pharmacotherapy with either buprenorphine or methadone in infants treated for neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) secondary to intrauterine exposure to methadone. This is a multi‐center, retrospective cohort study to assess length of treatment (LOT), hospital length of stay (LOS), and cumulative opioid exposure between infants treated with either methadone or buprenorphine for NAS secondary to in utero exposure to methadone. Infants delivered at a gestational age ≥35 weeks and a maternal history of opioid‐use disorder and/or urine drug screen positive for methadone, and postnatal pharmacotherapy for NAS with either buprenorphine or methadone as first‐line opioid replacement therapy, were eligible. Median LOT, LOS, and cumulative opioid exposure were compared between buprenorphine‐ and methadone‐treated infants. A total of 156 infants (48 treated with buprenorphine and 108 with methadone) were identified. The median LOT and LOS for buprenorphine‐treated infants was 8 and 13 days compared with 15 and 20 days for methadone‐treated infants, respectively, P < .001 for both outcomes. Median cumulative opioid dose in morphine equivalents was 0.6 mg/kg for buprenorphine‐treated infants vs 1.05 mg/kg for methadone‐treated infants, P < .001. No adverse effects were noted among either group. Of infants treated with buprenorphine, 34 (71%) required the addition of adjunctive pharmacotherapy during the NICU stay, compared with 31 (32%) in the methadone‐treated group, P = .0008. However, significantly fewer infants treated with buprenorphine required continuation of therapy beyond discharge as compared with those treated with methadone. The difference is most likely a reflection of the protocols used by the sites. In infants that required pharmacotherapy for NAS secondary to intrauterine exposure to methadone, treatment with buprenorphine, compared with methadone therapy, was associated with better outcomes. If confirmed with prospective data, buprenorphine could be considered first‐line therapy for the two medication‐assisted treatment regimens recommended by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
我们的目的是比较丁丙诺啡和美沙酮药物治疗治疗因宫内美沙酮暴露而继发的新生儿戒断综合征(NAS)的结果。这是一项多中心、回顾性队列研究，旨在评估接受美沙酮或丁丙诺啡治疗的婴儿在子宫内美沙酮暴露后继发NAS的治疗时间(LOT)、住院时间(LOS)和累积阿片类药物暴露情况。孕龄≥35周出生的婴儿，母亲有阿片类药物使用障碍史和/或尿液美沙酮药物筛查阳性，产后以丁丙诺啡或美沙酮作为一线阿片类药物替代治疗的NAS药物治疗均符合条件。比较丁丙诺啡和美沙酮治疗婴儿的LOT、LOS和累积阿片类药物暴露的中位数。共有156名婴儿被确定(48名接受丁丙诺啡治疗，108名接受美沙酮治疗)。丁丙诺啡治疗的婴儿LOT和LOS的中位数分别为8天和13天，而美沙酮治疗的婴儿LOT和LOS的中位数分别为15天和20天，两种结果的P < 0.001。丁丙诺啡治疗的婴儿中位阿片类药物累积剂量为0.6 mg/kg，美沙酮治疗的婴儿中位阿片类药物累积剂量为1.05 mg/kg, P < 0.001。两组均未发现不良反应。在接受丁丙诺啡治疗的婴儿中，有34例(71%)在新生儿重症监护病房期间需要额外的辅助药物治疗，而美沙酮治疗组为31例(32%)，P = 0.0008。然而，与接受美沙酮治疗的婴儿相比，接受丁丙诺啡治疗的婴儿在出院后需要继续治疗的人数明显减少。这种差异很可能反映了网站使用的协议。对于因宫内美沙酮暴露而继发NAS需要药物治疗的婴儿，与美沙酮治疗相比，丁丙诺啡治疗与更好的结果相关。如果前瞻性数据得到证实，丁丙诺啡可作为美国妇产科医师学会推荐的两种药物辅助治疗方案的一线治疗。
{"title":"Buprenorphine pharmacotherapy for the management of neonatal abstinence syndrome in methadone‐exposed neonates","authors":"Afshin A Taleghani, B. Isemann, Ward Rice, Laura P Ward, K. Wedig, H. Akinbi","doi":"10.1002/pne2.12008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pne2.12008","url":null,"abstract":"We aimed to compare the outcomes of pharmacotherapy with either buprenorphine or methadone in infants treated for neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) secondary to intrauterine exposure to methadone. This is a multi‐center, retrospective cohort study to assess length of treatment (LOT), hospital length of stay (LOS), and cumulative opioid exposure between infants treated with either methadone or buprenorphine for NAS secondary to in utero exposure to methadone. Infants delivered at a gestational age ≥35 weeks and a maternal history of opioid‐use disorder and/or urine drug screen positive for methadone, and postnatal pharmacotherapy for NAS with either buprenorphine or methadone as first‐line opioid replacement therapy, were eligible. Median LOT, LOS, and cumulative opioid exposure were compared between buprenorphine‐ and methadone‐treated infants. A total of 156 infants (48 treated with buprenorphine and 108 with methadone) were identified. The median LOT and LOS for buprenorphine‐treated infants was 8 and 13 days compared with 15 and 20 days for methadone‐treated infants, respectively, P < .001 for both outcomes. Median cumulative opioid dose in morphine equivalents was 0.6 mg/kg for buprenorphine‐treated infants vs 1.05 mg/kg for methadone‐treated infants, P < .001. No adverse effects were noted among either group. Of infants treated with buprenorphine, 34 (71%) required the addition of adjunctive pharmacotherapy during the NICU stay, compared with 31 (32%) in the methadone‐treated group, P = .0008. However, significantly fewer infants treated with buprenorphine required continuation of therapy beyond discharge as compared with those treated with methadone. The difference is most likely a reflection of the protocols used by the sites. In infants that required pharmacotherapy for NAS secondary to intrauterine exposure to methadone, treatment with buprenorphine, compared with methadone therapy, was associated with better outcomes. If confirmed with prospective data, buprenorphine could be considered first‐line therapy for the two medication‐assisted treatment regimens recommended by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.","PeriodicalId":19634,"journal":{"name":"Paediatric & Neonatal Pain","volume":"83 1","pages":"33 - 38"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82141916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Alka Sara Saju, Lilly Prasad, Menaka Reghuraman, Immanuel Karl Sampath
Every child who contacts a healthcare setting has a potential for intravenous cannulation (IV) procedure and related pain, fear, and distress. Many of the healthcare professionals recognize that there is a lack of intervention to prevent multiple cannulation attempts and to reduce pain and distress inflicted to children during IV cannulation. A quasi‐experimental study was undertaken in pediatric patients to study the effect of a vein‐viewing device (VTorch) on IV cannulation procedure. The number of cannulation attempts and time taken for successful cannulation were assessed with the use of this device (experimental group, n = 159) and compared it with the standard procedure (control group, n = 159). The effect of this device in cannulation associated pain, fear, and behavioral distress were also evaluated among these children. Using Vein‐viewing device as an aid for IV cannulation significantly reduced the time taken for cannulation (P = .003) and the number of cannulation attempts (P = .03). In addition, there was a significant increase in the first‐attempt cannulation success rate with the use of this device (P = .04). The use of vein‐viewing device did not have any direct effect on cannulation associated pain, fear, or behavioral distress among the study participants. The results of this study may aid in improving the quality of intravenous access procedure in pediatric patients.
{"title":"Use of vein‐viewing device to assist intravenous cannulation decreases the time and number of attempts for successful cannulation in pediatric patients","authors":"Alka Sara Saju, Lilly Prasad, Menaka Reghuraman, Immanuel Karl Sampath","doi":"10.1002/pne2.12009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pne2.12009","url":null,"abstract":"Every child who contacts a healthcare setting has a potential for intravenous cannulation (IV) procedure and related pain, fear, and distress. Many of the healthcare professionals recognize that there is a lack of intervention to prevent multiple cannulation attempts and to reduce pain and distress inflicted to children during IV cannulation. A quasi‐experimental study was undertaken in pediatric patients to study the effect of a vein‐viewing device (VTorch) on IV cannulation procedure. The number of cannulation attempts and time taken for successful cannulation were assessed with the use of this device (experimental group, n = 159) and compared it with the standard procedure (control group, n = 159). The effect of this device in cannulation associated pain, fear, and behavioral distress were also evaluated among these children. Using Vein‐viewing device as an aid for IV cannulation significantly reduced the time taken for cannulation (P = .003) and the number of cannulation attempts (P = .03). In addition, there was a significant increase in the first‐attempt cannulation success rate with the use of this device (P = .04). The use of vein‐viewing device did not have any direct effect on cannulation associated pain, fear, or behavioral distress among the study participants. The results of this study may aid in improving the quality of intravenous access procedure in pediatric patients.","PeriodicalId":19634,"journal":{"name":"Paediatric & Neonatal Pain","volume":"9 1","pages":"39 - 44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86959114","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：