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.

Non-pharmacological management of infant and young child procedural pain.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence of the long-term implications of unrelieved pain during infancy, it is evident that infant pain is still under-managed and unmanaged. Inadequately managed pain in infancy, a period of exponential development, can have implications across the lifespan. Therefore, a comprehensive and systematic review of pain management strategies is integral to appropriate infant pain management. This is an update of a previously published review update in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2015, Issue 12) of the same title. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and adverse events of non-pharmacological interventions for infant and child (aged up to three years) acute pain, excluding kangaroo care, sucrose, breastfeeding/breast milk, and music. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE-Ovid platform, EMBASE-OVID platform, PsycINFO-OVID platform, CINAHL-EBSCO platform and trial registration websites (ClinicalTrials.gov; International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) (March 2015 to October 2020). An update search was completed in July 2022, but studies identified at this point were added to 'Awaiting classification' for a future update.  We also searched reference lists and contacted researchers via electronic list-serves.  We incorporated 76 new studies into the review.  SELECTION CRITERIA: Participants included infants from birth to three years in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or cross-over RCTs that had a no-treatment control comparison. Studies were eligible for inclusion in the analysis if they compared a non-pharmacological pain management strategy to a no-treatment control group (15 different strategies). In addition, we also analysed studies when the unique effect of adding a non-pharmacological pain management strategy onto another pain management strategy could be assessed (i.e. additive effects on a sweet solution, non-nutritive sucking, or swaddling) (three strategies). The eligible control groups for these additive studies were sweet solution only, non-nutritive sucking only, or swaddling only, respectively. Finally, we qualitatively described six interventions that met the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the review, but not in the analysis.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The outcomes assessed in the review were pain response (reactivity and regulation) and adverse events. The level of certainty in the evidence and risk of bias were based on the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the GRADE approach. We analysed the standardised mean difference (SMD) using the generic inverse variance method to determine effect sizes.  MAIN RESULTS: We included total of 138 studies (11,058 participants), which includes an additional 76 new studies for this update. Of these 138 studies, we analysed 115 (9048 participants) and described 23 (2010 participants) qualitatively. We described qualitatively studies that could not be meta-analysed due to being the only studies in their category or statistical reporting issues. We report the results of the 138 included studies here. An SMD effect size of 0.2 represents a small effect, 0.5 a moderate effect, and 0.8 a large effect. The thresholds for the I2 interpretation were established as follows: not important (0% to 40%); moderate heterogeneity (30% to 60%); substantial heterogeneity (50% to 90%); considerable heterogeneity (75% to 100%). The most commonly studied acute procedures were heel sticks (63 studies) and needlestick procedures for the purposes of vaccines/vitamins (35 studies). We judged most studies to have high risk of bias (103 out of 138), with the most common methodological concerns relating to blinding of personnel and outcome assessors. Pain responses were examined during two separate pain phases: pain reactivity (within the first 30 seconds after the acutely painful stimulus) and immediate pain regulation (after the first 30 seconds following the acutely painful stimulus). We report below the strategies with the strongest evidence base for each age group. In preterm born neonates, non-nutritive sucking may reduce pain reactivity (SMD -0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.03 to -0.11, moderate effect; I2 = 93%, considerable heterogeneity) and improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -0.61, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.27, moderate effect; I2 = 81%, considerable heterogeneity), based on very low-certainty evidence. Facilitated tucking may also reduce pain reactivity (SMD -1.01, 95% CI -1.44 to -0.58, large effect; I2 = 93%, considerable heterogeneity) and improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -0.59, 95% CI -0.92 to -0.26, moderate effect; I2 = 87%, considerable heterogeneity); however, this is also based on very low-certainty evidence. While swaddling likely does not reduce pain reactivity in preterm neonates (SMD -0.60, 95% CI -1.23 to 0.04, no effect; I2 = 91%, considerable heterogeneity), it has been shown to possibly improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -1.21, 95% CI -2.05 to -0.38, large effect; I2 = 89%, considerable heterogeneity), based on very low-certainty evidence. In full-term born neonates, non-nutritive sucking may reduce pain reactivity (SMD -1.13, 95% CI -1.57 to -0.68, large effect; I2 = 82%, considerable heterogeneity) and improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -1.49, 95% CI -2.20 to -0.78, large effect; I2 = 92%, considerable heterogeneity), based on very low-certainty evidence.  In full-term born older infants, structured parent involvement was the intervention most studied. Results showed that this intervention has little to no effect in reducing pain reactivity (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.03, no effect; I2 = 46%, moderate heterogeneity) or improving immediate pain regulation (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.21, no effect; I2 = 74%, substantial heterogeneity), based on low- to moderate-certainty evidence. Of these five interventions most studied, only two studies observed adverse events, specifically vomiting (one preterm neonate) and desaturation (one full-term neonate hospitalised in the NICU) following the non-nutritive sucking intervention. The presence of considerable heterogeneity limited our confidence in the findings for certain analyses, as did the preponderance of evidence of very low to low certainty based on GRADE judgements. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, non-nutritive sucking, facilitated tucking, and swaddling may reduce pain behaviours in preterm born neonates. Non-nutritive sucking may also reduce pain behaviours in full-term neonates. No interventions based on a substantial body of evidence showed promise in reducing pain behaviours in older infants. Most analyses were based on very low- or low-certainty grades of evidence and none were based on high-certainty evidence. Therefore, the lack of confidence in the evidence would require further research before we could draw a definitive conclusion.

Evaluation of the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R) e-Learning Module: Immediate and Sustained Competency.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health (e-health) learning is a potential avenue to educate health professionals about accurately using infant pain assessment tools, although little is known about the impact of e-health interventions on clinical competence. PURPOSE: To evaluate whether an e-health learning module for teaching the accurate use of the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R) pain assessment tool results in immediate and sustained competency to assess infant pain. METHODS: Neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) nurses who participated in a larger study across 2 tertiary NICUs in Canada examining the implementation and clinical utility of the PIPP-R e-learning module completed 2 follow-up evaluations at 1 week and 3 months. Participants were asked to view a video recording of an infant undergoing a painful procedure and to assess the infant's pain intensity response using the PIPP-R measure. Immediate and sustained competency was assessed via interrater consensus of participant-reported PIPP-R scores compared with those of an experienced trained coder. RESULTS: Of the 25 eligible nurses, 22 completed 1-week and 3-month follow-up evaluations. At the 1-week follow-up, 84% of nurses scored the video accurately compared with 50% at 3 months. Behavioral pain indicators were more likely to be scored incorrectly than physiological indicators. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Follow-up training after completion of the initial e-learning module training may improve competency related to the clinical use of the PIPP-R tool to assess infant pain over time. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Additional study regarding the need and timing of e-health training to optimize sustained competency in infant pain assessment is warranted.

Effectiveness of parental education about pain in the neonatal period on knowledge, attitudes, and practices: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Despite the availability of effective, safe, and feasible pain management strategies, infant pain remains undertreated. Parents can play a key role in advocating for or delivering pain management strategies if they are educated. To date, a quantitative synthesis of the effectiveness of parental education about pain management in the neonatal period has not been performed. Objective: To systematically review the effectiveness of parental education during the neonatal period on pain management in infancy. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized trials (NRTs) that evaluated parental education with respect to pain management during the neonatal period in any setting from inception to February 2021. Screening of article titles and abstracts and data extraction were performed in duplicate. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk Bias Tool 2.0 and the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions for RCTs and NRTs, respectively. As per the GRADE methodology, critically important and important outcomes were identified. Critically important outcomes included utilization of pain management strategies and infant pain. Important outcomes included parental knowledge about pain mitigation strategies, parental attitudes, compliance with painful procedures, procedure outcomes, and safety. Data were combined and presented as relative risk (RR) or mean or standardized mean difference (MD or SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Of the six studies eligible for inclusion, four studies were RCTs and two studies were NRTs. Written information and/or video were used to deliver parental education during the neonatal period in hospital settings in all studies. Four studies (two RCTs and two NRTs) reported on critically important outcomes. The risk of bias was low for the two RCTs and moderate to serious for the two NRTs. Utilization of pain management strategies was assessed for heel lance in the first 48 hours of life in two studies and for vaccine injection at 2 to 6 months of life in two studies. Higher utilization rate for pain management strategies was reported in the pain education group in three studies (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.04, 1.26; N=2712). There was no difference in the mean number of pain management strategies used in one NRT tracking utilization tracking utilization as continuous data (MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.01, 0.41; N=178). Parent-reported infant pain scores were lower in the pain education group in one RCT (MD -0.16, 95% CI -0.27, -0.06; N=1615). The quality of evidence for the outcome of utilization of pain management strategies was very low while for the outcome of infant pain the quality of evidence was moderate. Five studies (3 RCTs and 2 NRTs) reported on important outcomes. The risk of bias was low for two RCTs and high for one RCT and moderate to serious for the two NRTs. Parental knowledge about pain management strategies (SMD 0.54, 95% CI 0.26, 0.82), parental confidence in their ability to manage pain (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.14, 0.34), parental satisfaction with education (MD 1.18, 95% CI 0.84, 1.52) and parental satisfaction with pain management (RR 1.05. 95% CI 1.01, 1.08) were increased in the pain education group. None of the included studies reported on procedural outcomes. No adverse events with the pain education nor the use of pain management interventions were reported in one study. Conclusions: Parental education in the neonatal period was effective in increasing utilization of pain management strategies during painful procedures. Reduction of pain in infants is based on one study of moderate quality. Furthermore, parental education increased parental knowledge about pain management strategies, confidence in their ability to manage infant pain, and satisfaction with the education and pain management. Parental pain education should be incorporated into postnatal care.

Procedural Pain in Hospitalized Neonates in Kenya.

PURPOSE: The study was conducted to understand the nature and frequency of painful procedures and use of analgesia in neonatal units in Kenya. DESIGN AND METHODS: Descriptive prospective study was conducted in a regional Level I and a university-affiliated Level II neonatal unit in Western Kenya. Two hundred term and preterm neonates who were hospitalized during the first day of life were recruited. A validated checklist was used to audit medical charts of hospitalized neonates. Painful procedures and pain treatment interventions accompanying all procedures performed during the first seven days of hospitalization were documented. Descriptive statistics, t-tests and χ2 were usedto determine frequency and factors influencing the frequency of procedures. RESULTS: A total of 1693 painful procedures (mean = 1.6 ± 1.1) were performed with most of them being tissue-damaging (n = 1291) including intravenous cannulation and intramuscular injection. Neonates were less likely to undergo procedures if there were born at term (RR 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76-0.95, p = .003) but more likely to experience procedures if admitted in a higher level of care (RR 1.57, 95% CI, 1.43-1.74, p < .001). Only one procedure was accompanied by analgesia. CONCLUSIONS: Neonates underwent few but highly invasive procedures without analgesia. Prematurity and a high level of care predisposed neonates to a higher burden of pain. IMPLICATIONS: Our findings underscore the urgent need for development of context-specific clinical practice guidelines on procedural pain treatment in sub-Saharan Africa.

Scaling up pediatric nurse specialist education in Ghana - a longitudinal, mixed methods evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate health human resources is a key challenge to advancing child survival in Ghana. Nurses are an essential human resource to target because they represent the largest portion of the health workforce. Building on lessons learned from our pilot pediatric nurse training project and World Health Organization guidelines for transforming and scaling up health professional education, this project aimed to; train 500 pediatric nurse specialists through a one-year training program; develop and integrate a critical mass of pediatric nursing faculty and establish a national standardized pediatric nursing curriculum. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a national pediatric nurse training program in Ghana at the end of 4 years, including eight cohorts with 330 graduates. METHODS: This was a mixed-method evaluation with surveys, focus groups and a pre-test/post-test design. Before and after surveys were used to measure knowledge and confidence at baseline and graduation. Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE) were used to measure clinical skills at baseline, graduation, and 14 months follow-up. At the end of every module, surveys were used to measure students' satisfaction. Focus groups at graduation qualitatively measured program outcomes. Repeat focus groups and surveys at 14 months after graduation captured the graduates' career progress, experiences reintegrating into the health system and long-term program outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, the graduates completed the program with significantly increased knowledge, confidence, and clinical skills. They also had increased job satisfaction and were able to apply what they learned to their jobs, including leadership skills and gender-sensitive care. Data from 14-month follow-up OSCEs showed that all graduates remained competent in communication, physical assessment, and emergency care, although some obtained a lower mark compared to their performance at graduation. This finding is linked with the observation that the amount of mentorship, support from leadership and equipment that the graduates accessed from their respective facilities varied. CONCLUSIONS: Mixed-methods evaluations demonstrated significant increases in knowledge confidence and skills by completing the program and maintenance of skills more than 1 year after graduation. Findings have implications for those working on the design, implementation, and evaluation of nursing education interventions in low- and middle-income countries.

The influence of gestational age in the psychometric testing of the Bernese Pain Scale for Neonates.

BACKGROUND: Assessing pain in neonates is challenging because full-term and preterm neonates of different gestational ages (GAs) have widely varied reactions to pain. We validated the Bernese Pain Scale for Neonates (BPSN) by testing its use among a large sample of neonates that represented all GAs. METHODS: In this prospective multisite validation study, we assessed 154 neonates between 24 2/7 and 41 4/7 weeks GA, based on the results of 1-5 capillary heel sticks in their first 14 days of life. From each heel stick, we produced three video sequences: baseline; heel stick; and, recovery. Five blinded nurses rated neonates' pain responses according to the BPSN. The underlying factor structure of the BPSN, interrater reliability, concurrent validity with the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R), construct validity, sensitivity and specificity, and the relationship between behavioural and physiological indicators were explored. We considered GA and gender as individual contextual factors. RESULTS: The factor analyses resulted in a model where the following behaviours best fit the data: crying; facial expression; and, posture. Pain scores for these behavioural items increased on average more than 1 point during the heel stick phases compared to the baseline and recovery phases (p < 0.001). Among physiological items, heart rate was more sensitive to pain than oxygen saturation. Heart rate averaged 0.646 points higher during the heel stick than the recovery phases (p < 0.001). GA increased along with pain scores: for every additional week of gestation, the average increase of behavioural pain score was 0.063 points (SE = 0.01, t = 5.49); average heart rate increased 0.042 points (SE = 0.01, t = 6.15). Sensitivity and specificity analyses indicated that the cut-off should increase with GA. Modified BPSN showed good concurrent validity with the PIPP-R (r = 0.600-0.758, p < 0.001). Correlations between the modified behavioural subscale and the item heart rate were low (r = 0.102-0.379). CONCLUSIONS: The modified BPSN that includes facial expression, crying, posture, and heart rate is a reliable and valid tool for assessing acute pain in full-term and preterm neonates, but our results suggest that adding different cut-off points for different GA-groups will improve the BPSN's clinical usefulness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was retrospectively registered in the database of Clinical Trial gov. Study ID-number: NCT 02749461 . Registration date: 12 April 2016.

Mothers' Perceptions about Pain in Hospitalized Newborn Infants in Kenya.

PURPOSE: Explore views of mothers about pain and pain treatment practices in hospitalized newborn infants. DESIGN AND METHODS: A Qualitative descriptive study using photo-elicitation technique was conducted in a level I and a level II neonatal units in Kenya. Fifteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with mothers of hospitalized infants. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using inductive content analysis approach. RESULTS: Mothers described the experience of witnessing their infants undergo painful procedures as emotionally and psychologically traumatic. Participants felt helpless for not being able to protect their infants from pain a situation which was made worse by health care providers who appeared less concerned about pain relief during procedures. Mothers' views demonstrated a good understanding of pain-relief strategies; they identified strategies that health care providers should routinely use to relief pain in hospitalized infants. Furthermore, participants desired to be involved in comforting their infants during clinical procedures. CONCLUSION: Repeated and untreated painful procedures continue to define the hospitalisation experience of newborn infants despite the presence of mothers who desire to be involved in comforting their infants during procedures. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: Minimizing the burden of pain and using pain-relieving interventions could reduce parental stress and optimize parental role attainment following hospitalisation.

A Parent-Targeted and Mediated Video Intervention to Improve Uptake of Pain Treatment for Infants During Newborn Screening: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

Most newborns undergo newborn screening blood tests. Breastfeeding, skin-to-skin care, and sweet solutions effectively reduce pain; however, these strategies are inconsistently used. We conducted a 2-armed pilot randomized controlled trial in a mother-baby unit to examine the feasibility and acceptability of a parent-targeted and -mediated video demonstrating use of these pain-reducing strategies and to obtain preliminary effectiveness data on uptake of pain management. One hundred parent-newborn dyads were randomized to view the video or receive usual care (51 intervention and 49 control arm). Consent and attrition rates were 70% and 1%, respectively. All participants in the intervention arm received the intervention as planned and reported an intention to recommend the video and to use at least 1 pain treatment with breastfeeding or skin-to-skin care preferred over sucrose. In the intervention arm, 60% of newborns received at least 1 pain treatment compared with 67% in the control arm (absolute difference, -7%; 95% confidence interval, -26 to 12). The video was well accepted and feasible to show to parents. As there was no evidence of effect on the use of pain management, major modifications are required before launching a full-scale trial. Effective means to translate evidence-based pain knowledge is warranted.

Cultural adaptation and harmonization of four Nordic translations of the revised Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP-R).

BACKGROUND: Preterm infants are especially vulnerable to pain. The intensive treatment often necessary for their survival unfortunately includes many painful interventions and procedures. Untreated pain can lead to both short- and long-term negative effects. The challenge of accurately detecting pain has been cited as a major reason for lack of pain management in these non-verbal patients. The Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) is one of the most extensively validated measures for assessing procedural pain in premature infants. A revised version, PIPP-R, was recently published and is reported to be more user-friendly and precise than the original version. The aims of the study were to develop translated versions of the PIPP-R in Finnish, Icelandic, Norwegian, and Swedish languages, and to establish their content validity through a cultural adaptation process using cognitive interviews. METHODS: PIPP-R was translated using the recommendations from the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research and enhanced with cognitive interviews. The respondent nurse was given a copy of the translated, national version of the measure and used this together with a text describing the infant in the film to assess the pain of an infant in a short film. During the assessment the nurse was asked to verbalize her thought process (thinking aloud) and upon completion the interviewer administered probing questions (verbal probing) from a structured interview guide. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a structured matrix approach. RESULTS: The systematic approach resulted in translated and culturally adapted versions of PIPP-R in the Finnish, Icelandic, Norwegian and Swedish languages. During the cultural adaptation process several problems were discovered regarding how the respondent understood and utilized the measure. The problems were either measure problems or other problems. Measure problems were solved by a change in the translated versions of the measure, while for other problems different solutions such as education or training were suggested. CONCLUSIONS: This study have resulted in translations of the PIPP-R that have content validity, high degree of clinical utility and displayed beginning equivalence with each other and the original version of the measure.

The minimally effective dose of sucrose for procedural pain relief in neonates: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Orally administered sucrose is effective and safe in reducing pain intensity during single, tissue-damaging procedures in neonates, and is commonly recommended in neonatal pain guidelines. However, there is wide variability in sucrose doses examined in research, and more than a 20-fold variation across neonatal care settings. The aim of this study was to determine the minimally effective dose of 24% sucrose for reducing pain in hospitalized neonates undergoing a single skin-breaking heel lance procedure. METHODS: A total of 245 neonates from 4 Canadian tertiary neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), born between 24 and 42 weeks gestational age (GA), were prospectively randomized to receive one of three doses of 24% sucrose, plus non-nutritive sucking/pacifier, 2 min before a routine heel lance: 0.1 ml (Group 1; n = 81), 0.5 ml (Group 2; n = 81), or 1.0 ml (Group 3; n = 83). The primary outcome was pain intensity measured at 30 and 60 s following the heel lance, using the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R). The secondary outcome was the incidence of adverse events. Analysis of covariance models, adjusting for GA and study site examined between group differences in pain intensity across intervention groups. RESULTS: There was no difference in mean pain intensity PIPP-R scores between treatment groups at 30 s (P = .97) and 60 s (P = .93); however, pain was not fully eliminated during the heel lance procedure. There were 5 reported adverse events among 5/245 (2.0%) neonates, with no significant differences in the proportion of events by sucrose dose (P = .62). All events resolved spontaneously without medical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The minimally effective dose of 24% sucrose required to treat pain associated with a single heel lance in neonates was 0.1 ml. Further evaluation regarding the sustained effectiveness of this dose in reducing pain intensity in neonates for repeated painful procedures is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02134873. Date: May 5, 2014 (retrospectively registered).

Implementation and preliminary effectiveness of a real-time pain management smartphone app for adolescents with cancer: A multicenter pilot clinical study.

BACKGROUND: Pain in adolescents with cancer (12-18 years) is common and negatively impacts health-related quality of life (HRQL). The Pain Squad+ smartphone app, which provides adolescents with real-time pain self-management support, was developed to address this issue. This study evaluated the implementation of the app to inform a future randomized controlled trial (RCT) and obtain treatment effect estimates for pain intensity, pain interference, HRQL, and self-efficacy. PROCEDURE: A one-group baseline/poststudy design with 40 adolescents recruited from two pediatric tertiary care centers was used. Baseline questionnaires were completed and adolescents used the app at least twice daily for 28 days, receiving algorithm-informed self-management advice depending on their reported pain. A nurse received alerts in response to sustained pain and contacted adolescents to assist in pain care. Poststudy questionnaires were completed. Descriptive analyses, with exploratory inferential testing conducted on health outcome data, were used to address study aims. RESULTS: Most (40/52; 77%) eligible adolescents participated. Two participants withdrew participation. Intervention fidelity was impacted by technical difficulties (occurring for 15% of participants) and a prolonged time for nurse contact in the event of sustained pain. Adherence to pain reporting was 68.8 ± 38.1%. Outcome measure completion rates were high and the intervention was acceptable to participants. Trends in improvements in pain intensity, pain interference, and HRQL were significant, with effect sizes of 0.23-0.67. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of Pain Squad+ is feasible and the app appears to improve pain-related outcomes for adolescents with cancer. A multicenter RCT will be undertaken to examine app effectiveness.

Individual contextual factors in the validation of the Bernese pain scale for neonates: protocol for a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: The Bernese Pain Scale for Neonates (BPSN) is a multidimensional pain assessment tool that is already widely used in clinical settings in the German speaking areas of Europe. Recent findings indicate that pain responses in preterm neonates are influenced by individual contextual factors, such as gestational age (GA), gender and the number of painful procedures experienced. Currently, the BPSN does not consider individual contextual factors. Therefore, the aim of this study is the validation of the BPSN using a large sample of neonates with different GAs. Furthermore, the influence of individual contextual factors on the variability in pain reactions across GA groups will be explored. The results will be used for a modification of the BPSN to account for individual contextual factors in future clinical pain assessment in neonates. METHODS AND DESIGN: This prospective multisite validation study with a repeated measures design will take place in three university hospital neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in Switzerland (Bern, Basel and Zurich). To examine the impact of GA on pain responses and their variability, the infants will be stratified into six GA groups ranging from 24 0/7 to 42 0/7. Among preterm infants, 2-5 routine capillary heel sticks within the first 14 days of life, and among full-term infants, two heel sticks during the first days of life will be documented. For each heel stick, measurements will be video recorded for each of three phases: baseline, heel stick, and recovery. The infants' pain responses will be rated according to the BPSN by five nurses who are blinded as to the number of each heel stick and as to the measurement phases. Individual contextual factors of interest will be extracted from patient charts. DISCUSSION: Understanding and considering the influence of individual contextual factors on pain responses in a revised version of the BPSN will help the clinical staff to more appropriately assess pain in neonates, particularly preterm neonates hospitalized in NICUs. Pain assessment is a first step toward appropriate and efficient pain management, which itself is an important factor in later motor and cognitive development in this vulnerable patient population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered in the database of Clinical Trial gov. Study ID-number: NCT 02749461 . Registration date: 12 April 2016.

The role of organizational context in moderating the effect of research use on pain outcomes in hospitalized children: a cross sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Despite substantial research on pediatric pain assessment and management, health care professionals do not adequately incorporate this knowledge into clinical practice. Organizational context (work environment) is a significant factor in influencing outcomes; however, the nature of the mechanisms are relatively unknown. The objective of this study was to assess how organizational context moderates the effect of research use and pain outcomes in hospitalized children. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was undertaken with 779 nurses in 32 patient care units in 8 Canadian pediatric hospitals, following implementation of a multifaceted knowledge translation intervention, Evidence-based Practice for Improving Quality (EPIQ). The influence of organizational context was assessed in relation to pain process (assessment and management) and clinical (pain intensity) outcomes. Organizational context was measured using the Alberta Context Tool that includes: leadership, culture, evaluation, social capital, informal interactions, formal interactions, structural and electronic resources, and organizational slack (staff, space, and time). Marginal modeling estimated the effects of instrumental research use (direct use of research knowledge) and conceptual research use (indirect use of research knowledge) on pain outcomes while examining the effects of context. RESULTS: Six of the 10 organizational context factors (culture, social capital, informal interactions, resources, and organizational slack [space and time]) significantly moderated the effect of instrumental research use on pain assessment; four factors (culture, social capital, resources and organizational slack time) moderated the effect of conceptual research use and pain assessment. Only two factors (evaluation and formal interactions) moderated the effect of instrumental research use on pain management. All organizational factors except slack space significantly moderated the effect of instrumental research use on pain intensity; informal interactions and organizational slack space moderated the effect of conceptual research use and pain intensity. CONCLUSIONS: Many aspects of organizational context consistently moderated the effects of instrumental research use on pain assessment and pain intensity, while only a few influenced conceptual use of research on pain outcomes. Organizational context factors did not generally influence the effect of research use on pain management. Further research is required to further explore the relationships between organizational context and pain management outcomes.

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.

The Relationship Between Nursing Experience and Education and the Occurrence of Reported Pediatric Medication Administration Errors.

Medication errors are one of the most common incidents in the hospitals. They can be harmful, and they are even more detrimental for pediatric patients. This study explored the relationship between nursing experience, education, the frequency and severity of reported pediatric medication administration errors (PMAEs). The data for this study were collected from a larger pan Canadian study. A survey tool was developed to collect self-reported data from nurses. In addition to descriptive statistics, a Poisson regression or a multiple linear regression was completed to address the research questions, and a Boneferrai correction was conducted to adjust for the small sample size. Results demonstrated that on units with more nurses with a higher level of current experience, more PMAEs were reported (p=.001), however; the PMAEs reported by these nurses were not as severe (p=.003). Implications to advance both safe medication delivery in the pediatric setting and safe culture of reporting for both actual and potential errors are identified.

How do healthcare workers judge pain in older palliative care patients with delirium near the end of life?

OBJECTIVE: Pain and delirium are commonly reported in older people with advanced cancer. However, assessing pain in this population is challenging, and there is currently no validated assessment tool for this task. The present retrospective cohort study was conducted to understand how healthcare workers (HCWs; nurses and physicians) determine that older cancer patients with delirium are in pain. METHOD: We reviewed the medical records of consecutive palliative care inpatients, 65 years of age and above (N = 113), in order to identify patient-based cues used by HCWs to make pain judgments and to examine how the cues differ by delirium subtype and outcome. RESULTS: We found that HCWs routinely make judgments about pain in older patients with delirium using a repertoire of strategies that includes patient self-report and observations of spontaneous and evoked behavior. Using these strategies, HCWs judged pain to be highly prevalent in this inpatient palliative care setting. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: These novel findings will inform the development of valid and reliable tools to assess pain in older cancer patients with delirium.

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.

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.  This is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 10 2011 entitled 'Non-pharmacological management of infant and young child procedural pain'. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions for infant and child (up to three years) acute pain, excluding kangaroo care, and music. Analyses were run separately for infant age (preterm, neonate, older) and pain response (pain reactivity, immediate pain regulation).  SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (Issue 2 of 12, 2015), MEDLINE-Ovid platform (March 2015), EMBASE-OVID platform (April 2011 to March 2015), PsycINFO-OVID platform (April 2011 to February 2015), and CINAHL-EBSCO platform (April 2011 to March 2015). We also searched reference lists and contacted researchers via electronic list-serves. New studies were incorporated into the review. We refined search strategies with a Cochrane-affiliated librarian. For this update, nine articles from the original 2011 review pertaining to Kangaroo Care were excluded, but 21 additional studies were added. SELECTION CRITERIA: Participants included infants from birth to three years. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or RCT cross-overs that had a no-treatment control comparison were eligible for inclusion in the analyses. However, when the additive effects of a non-pharmacological intervention could be assessed, these studies were also included. We examined studies that met all inclusion criteria except for study design (e.g. had an active control) to qualitatively contextualize results. There were 63 included articles in the current update. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Study quality ratings and risk of bias were based on the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and GRADE approach. We analysed the standardized mean difference (SMD) using the generic inverse variance method. MAIN RESULTS: Sixty-three studies, with 4905 participants, were analysed. The most commonly studied acute procedures were heel-sticks (32 studies) and needles (17 studies). The largest SMD for treatment improvement over control conditions on pain reactivity were: non-nutritive sucking-related interventions (neonate: SMD -1.20, 95% CI -2.01 to -0.38) and swaddling/facilitated tucking (preterm: SMD -0.89; 95% CI -1.37 to -0.40). For immediate pain regulation, the largest SMDs were: non-nutritive sucking-related interventions (preterm: SMD -0.43; 95% CI -0.63 to -0.23; neonate: SMD -0.90; 95% CI -1.54 to -0.25; older infant: SMD -1.34; 95% CI -2.14 to -0.54), swaddling/facilitated tucking (preterm: SMD -0.71; 95% CI -1.00 to -0.43), and rocking/holding (neonate: SMD -0.75; 95% CI -1.20 to -0.30). Fifty two of our 63 trials did not report adverse events. The presence of significant heterogeneity limited our confidence in the findings for certain analyses, as did the preponderance of very low quality evidence. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence that different non-pharmacological interventions can be used with preterms, neonates, and older infants to significantly manage pain behaviors associated with acutely painful procedures. The most established evidence was for non-nutritive sucking, swaddling/facilitated tucking, and rocking/holding. All analyses reflected that more research is needed to bolster our confidence in the direction of the findings. There are significant gaps in the existing literature on non-pharmacological management of acute pain in infancy.

Perceptions of health professionals on pain in extremely low gestational age infants.

Extremely low gestational age infants (<28 weeks at birth) experience significant pain from repeated therapeutic procedures while hospitalized in the neonatal intensive care unit. As part of a program of research examining pain in preterm infants, we conducted a qualitatively driven mixed-methods design, supplemented with a qualitative and quantitative component, to understand how health care professionals (HCPs) assess and manage procedural pain for tiny and underdeveloped preterm infants. Fifty-nine HCPs from different disciplines across four tertiary-level neonatal units in Canada participated in individual or focus group interviews and completed a brief questionnaire. Four themes from the content analysis were (a) subtlety and unpredictability of pain indicators, (b) infant and caregiver attributes and contextual factors that influence pain response and practices, (c) the complex nature of pain assessment, and (d) uncertainty in the management of pain. The information gleaned from this study can assist in identifying gaps in knowledge and informing unit-based and organizational knowledge translation strategies for this vulnerable population.