Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters

Database
Language
Affiliation country
Publication year range
1.
BMJ Paediatr Open ; 7(1)2023 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37821124

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the procedural pain experienced by neonates in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) setting and determine the corresponding pain grades. METHODS: Two experienced nurses independently used the Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS) to evaluate the neonatal pain during procedures taking place in the tertiary NICU and two level-two neonatal care units in the Children's Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine. The mean and distribution of NIPS pain scores and the corresponding pain grades of participants when experiencing clinical painful procedures were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 957 neonates exposed to 15 common clinical painful procedures were included in the study. The clinical painful procedures experienced by 957 participants could be divided into three groups: severe pain (NIPS score 5-7: peripheral intravenous cannulation, arterial catheterisation, arterial blood sampling, peripherally inserted central catheter placement and nasopharyngeal suctioning), mild to moderate pain (NIPS score 3-4: finger prick, intramuscular injection, adhesive removal, endotracheal intubation suctioning, heel prick, lumbar puncture and subcutaneous injection) and no pain to mild pain (NIPS score 0-2: gastric tube insertion, enema and intravenous injection). CONCLUSIONS: The neonatal pain response to clinical procedures in NICU had certain pattern and preintervention drug analgesia could be taken for painful procedures with clustered high NIPS pain scores. Meanwhile, full coverage non-drug pain relief measures could be taken for procedures that are with scattered pain scores, and real-time pain evaluation should be provided to determine whether further drug analgesia is required.


Subject(s)
Catheterization, Peripheral , Pain, Procedural , Infant, Newborn , Infant , Child , Humans , Intensive Care Units, Neonatal , Pain, Procedural/diagnosis , Pain, Procedural/etiology , Pain, Procedural/prevention & control , Pain/diagnosis , Pain/etiology , Pain/prevention & control , Pain Management/methods , Catheterization, Peripheral/adverse effects
2.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 13(16)2023 Aug 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37627921

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Neonatal pain assessment (NPA) represents a huge global problem of essential importance, as a timely and accurate assessment of neonatal pain is indispensable for implementing pain management. PURPOSE: To investigate the consistency of pain scores derived through video-based NPA (VB-NPA) and on-site NPA (OS-NPA), providing the scientific foundation and feasibility of adopting VB-NPA results in a real-world scenario as the gold standard for neonatal pain in clinical studies and labels for artificial intelligence (AI)-based NPA (AI-NPA) applications. SETTING: A total of 598 neonates were recruited from a pediatric hospital in China. METHODS: This observational study recorded 598 neonates who underwent one of 10 painful procedures, including arterial blood sampling, heel blood sampling, fingertip blood sampling, intravenous injection, subcutaneous injection, peripheral intravenous cannulation, nasopharyngeal suctioning, retention enema, adhesive removal, and wound dressing. Two experienced nurses performed OS-NPA and VB-NPA at a 10-day interval through double-blind scoring using the Neonatal Infant Pain Scale to evaluate the pain level of the neonates. Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability were calculated and analyzed, and a paired samples t-test was used to explore the bias and consistency of the assessors' pain scores derived through OS-NPA and VB-NPA. The impact of different label sources was evaluated using three state-of-the-art AI methods trained with labels given by OS-NPA and VB-NPA, respectively. RESULTS: The intra-rater reliability of the same assessor was 0.976-0.983 across different times, as measured by the intraclass correlation coefficient. The inter-rater reliability was 0.983 for single measures and 0.992 for average measures. No significant differences were observed between the OS-NPA scores and the assessment of an independent VB-NPA assessor. The different label sources only caused a limited accuracy loss of 0.022-0.044 for the three AI methods. CONCLUSION: VB-NPA in a real-world scenario is an effective way to assess neonatal pain due to its high intra-rater and inter-rater reliability compared to OS-NPA and could be used for the labeling of large-scale NPA video databases for clinical studies and AI training.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL