父母远离疼痛:电子健康学习平台的准实验研究,评估家长主导的疼痛管理的可接受性、可行性和利用率。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-29 DOI:10.1111/scs.13297
Brianna Hughes, Ruth Martin-Misener, Margot Latimer, Michael Smit, Patrick McGrath, Marsha Campbell-Yeo
{"title":"父母远离疼痛:电子健康学习平台的准实验研究,评估家长主导的疼痛管理的可接受性、可行性和利用率。","authors":"Brianna Hughes, Ruth Martin-Misener, Margot Latimer, Michael Smit, Patrick McGrath, Marsha Campbell-Yeo","doi":"10.1111/scs.13297","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the impact of an eHealth educational resource about infant procedural pain management, given during the prenatal period, on feasibility, acceptability, knowledge, self-efficacy, and involvement.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Routine health care requires newborns to have painful procedures (e.g., intramuscular injection). The impacts of untreated pain in neonates are widely recognised but adoption of effective procedural pain management strategies in clinical practice varies. There is clear evidence supporting the effectiveness of parent-led pain management during procedures (e.g., skin-to-skin care) and reputable resources to raise awareness among parents are warranted. Our team co-created Parenting Pain Away, a website to equip parents with evidence to assist with managing the pain of procedures and empower them to be involved.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A quasi-experimental evaluation using a pre/post intervention design with low-risk expectant parents.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 41 participants, before intervention exposure participants were familiar or had used skin-to-skin care (n = 33), breastfeeding (n = 30) and sucrose (n = 13) as pain management. Most participants (n = 38) desired more information on how to be involved. Providing access to Parenting Pain Away during pregnancy was supported and participants ranked the website above average using the System Usability Scale. Parenting Pain Away did not have a statistically significant influence on outcomes. Participants reported variation in clinical support with parent-led pain management.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A multifaceted approach is recommended to maintain infant procedural pain management.</p><p><strong>Implications for the profession and patient care: </strong>Equipping parents with knowledge related to infant pain management using an eHealth approach satisfied their information desires. The study findings are important considerations for perinatal care providers, policy makers, and families to finally achieve adequate procedural pain management.</p><p><strong>Reporting method: </strong>This study used the STROBE checklist, adhering to EQUATOR guidelines.</p><p><strong>Patient and public contribution: </strong>A stakeholder group (expectant parents, parents, perinatal researchers, clinicians, and administrators) was created to inform the study design and intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":48171,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences","volume":" ","pages":"960-972"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Parenting pain away: Quasi-experimental study of an eHealth learning platform to evaluate acceptability, feasibility, and utilisation of parent-led pain management.\",\"authors\":\"Brianna Hughes, Ruth Martin-Misener, Margot Latimer, Michael Smit, Patrick McGrath, Marsha Campbell-Yeo\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/scs.13297\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the impact of an eHealth educational resource about infant procedural pain management, given during the prenatal period, on feasibility, acceptability, knowledge, self-efficacy, and involvement.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Routine health care requires newborns to have painful procedures (e.g., intramuscular injection). The impacts of untreated pain in neonates are widely recognised but adoption of effective procedural pain management strategies in clinical practice varies. There is clear evidence supporting the effectiveness of parent-led pain management during procedures (e.g., skin-to-skin care) and reputable resources to raise awareness among parents are warranted. Our team co-created Parenting Pain Away, a website to equip parents with evidence to assist with managing the pain of procedures and empower them to be involved.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A quasi-experimental evaluation using a pre/post intervention design with low-risk expectant parents.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 41 participants, before intervention exposure participants were familiar or had used skin-to-skin care (n = 33), breastfeeding (n = 30) and sucrose (n = 13) as pain management. Most participants (n = 38) desired more information on how to be involved. Providing access to Parenting Pain Away during pregnancy was supported and participants ranked the website above average using the System Usability Scale. Parenting Pain Away did not have a statistically significant influence on outcomes. Participants reported variation in clinical support with parent-led pain management.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A multifaceted approach is recommended to maintain infant procedural pain management.</p><p><strong>Implications for the profession and patient care: </strong>Equipping parents with knowledge related to infant pain management using an eHealth approach satisfied their information desires. The study findings are important considerations for perinatal care providers, policy makers, and families to finally achieve adequate procedural pain management.</p><p><strong>Reporting method: </strong>This study used the STROBE checklist, adhering to EQUATOR guidelines.</p><p><strong>Patient and public contribution: </strong>A stakeholder group (expectant parents, parents, perinatal researchers, clinicians, and administrators) was created to inform the study design and intervention.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48171,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"960-972\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/scs.13297\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/scs.13297","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评估在产前提供有关婴儿手术疼痛管理的电子健康教育资源对可行性、可接受性、知识、自我效能和参与度的影响:背景:常规医疗保健要求新生儿接受疼痛治疗(如肌肉注射)。新生儿疼痛得不到治疗的影响已得到广泛认可,但在临床实践中采用有效的程序性疼痛管理策略的情况却不尽相同。有明确的证据表明,在手术过程中由家长主导的疼痛管理(如皮肤接触护理)是有效的,因此有必要提供声誉良好的资源来提高家长的认识。我们的团队共同创建了 "远离疼痛,为人父母 "网站,旨在向父母提供协助处理手术疼痛的证据,并让他们有能力参与其中:方法:对低风险准父母进行干预前/后设计的准实验评估:在 41 名参与者中,干预前参与者熟悉或使用过皮肤护理(33 人)、母乳喂养(30 人)和蔗糖(13 人)作为止痛方法。大多数参与者(38 人)希望获得更多有关如何参与的信息。与会者支持在怀孕期间访问 "远离育儿疼痛 "网站,并使用系统可用性量表对该网站进行了高于平均水平的评分。Parenting Painway 对结果的影响没有统计学意义。参与者报告称,在家长主导的疼痛管理方面,临床支持存在差异:建议采用多方面的方法来维持婴儿手术疼痛管理:利用电子保健方法让家长掌握婴儿疼痛管理的相关知识,满足了他们的信息需求。研究结果是围产期保健提供者、政策制定者和家庭最终实现充分的程序性疼痛管理的重要考虑因素:本研究使用了 STROBE 核对表,并遵循了 EQUATOR 指南:成立了一个利益相关者小组(准父母、父母、围产期研究人员、临床医生和管理人员),为研究设计和干预提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Parenting pain away: Quasi-experimental study of an eHealth learning platform to evaluate acceptability, feasibility, and utilisation of parent-led pain management.

Aim: To evaluate the impact of an eHealth educational resource about infant procedural pain management, given during the prenatal period, on feasibility, acceptability, knowledge, self-efficacy, and involvement.

Background: Routine health care requires newborns to have painful procedures (e.g., intramuscular injection). The impacts of untreated pain in neonates are widely recognised but adoption of effective procedural pain management strategies in clinical practice varies. There is clear evidence supporting the effectiveness of parent-led pain management during procedures (e.g., skin-to-skin care) and reputable resources to raise awareness among parents are warranted. Our team co-created Parenting Pain Away, a website to equip parents with evidence to assist with managing the pain of procedures and empower them to be involved.

Methods: A quasi-experimental evaluation using a pre/post intervention design with low-risk expectant parents.

Results: Of the 41 participants, before intervention exposure participants were familiar or had used skin-to-skin care (n = 33), breastfeeding (n = 30) and sucrose (n = 13) as pain management. Most participants (n = 38) desired more information on how to be involved. Providing access to Parenting Pain Away during pregnancy was supported and participants ranked the website above average using the System Usability Scale. Parenting Pain Away did not have a statistically significant influence on outcomes. Participants reported variation in clinical support with parent-led pain management.

Conclusion: A multifaceted approach is recommended to maintain infant procedural pain management.

Implications for the profession and patient care: Equipping parents with knowledge related to infant pain management using an eHealth approach satisfied their information desires. The study findings are important considerations for perinatal care providers, policy makers, and families to finally achieve adequate procedural pain management.

Reporting method: This study used the STROBE checklist, adhering to EQUATOR guidelines.

Patient and public contribution: A stakeholder group (expectant parents, parents, perinatal researchers, clinicians, and administrators) was created to inform the study design and intervention.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
5.30%
发文量
71
期刊介绍: Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences is an established quarterly, peer reviewed Journal with an outstanding international reputation. As the official publication of the Nordic College of Caring Science, the Journal shares their mission to contribute to the development and advancement of scientific knowledge on caring related to health, well-being, illness and the alleviation of human suffering. The emphasis is on research that has a patient, family and community focus and which promotes an interdisciplinary team approach. Of special interest are scholarly articles addressing and initiating dialogue on theoretical, empirical and methodological concerns related to critical issues. All articles are expected to demonstrate respect for human dignity and accountability to society. In addition to original research the Journal also publishes reviews, meta-syntheses and meta-analyses.
期刊最新文献
Exploring young adults' experiences with food allergy during their teenage years: A practice research study. Factors influencing job satisfaction and professional competencies in clinical practice among internationally educated nurses during the migration journey: A mixed-methods systematic review. Navigating parenthood in the face of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: A qualitative exploration of partner experiences. Meaning-oriented thematic analysis grounded in reflective lifeworld research-A holistic approach for caring science research. Catalysts for change: A qualitative study of middle managers' perception of nursing professional competence in primary healthcare.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1