Psychological interventions for needle-related procedural pain and distress in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: This is the second update of a Cochrane Review (Issue 4, 2006). Pain and distress from needle-related procedures are common during childhood and can be reduced through use of psychological interventions (cognitive or behavioral strategies, or both). Our first review update (Issue 10, 2013) showed efficacy of distraction and hypnosis for needle-related pain and distress in children and adolescents. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of psychological interventions for needle-related procedural pain and distress in children and adolescents. SEARCH METHODS: We searched six electronic databases for relevant trials: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; PsycINFO; Embase; Web of Science (ISI Web of Knowledge); and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). We sent requests for additional studies to pediatric pain and child health electronic listservs. We also searched registries for relevant completed trials: clinicaltrials.gov; and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int.trialsearch). We conducted searches up to September 2017 to identify records published since the last review update in 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included peer-reviewed published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with at least five participants per study arm, comparing a psychological intervention with a control or comparison group. Trials involved children aged two to 19 years undergoing any needle-related medical procedure. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors extracted data and assessed risks of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We examined pain and distress assessed by child self-report, observer global report, and behavioral measurement (primary outcomes). We also examined any reported physiological outcomes and adverse events (secondary outcomes). We used meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of identified psychological interventions relative to a comparator (i.e. no treatment, other active treatment, treatment as usual, or waitlist) for each outcome separately. We used Review Manager 5 software to compute standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 59 trials (20 new for this update) with 5550 participants. Needle procedures primarily included venipuncture, intravenous insertion, and vaccine injections. Studies included children aged two to 19 years, with few trials focused on adolescents. The most common psychological interventions were distraction (n = 32), combined cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT; n = 18), and hypnosis (n = 8). Preparation/information (n = 4), breathing (n = 4), suggestion (n = 3), and memory alteration (n = 1) were also included. Control groups were often 'standard care', which varied across studies. Across all studies, 'Risk of bias' scores indicated several domains at high or unclear risk, most notably allocation concealment, blinding of participants and outcome assessment, and selective reporting. We downgraded the quality of evidence largely due to serious study limitations, inconsistency, and imprecision.Very low- to low-quality evidence supported the efficacy of distraction for self-reported pain (n = 30, 2802 participants; SMD -0.56, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.33) and distress (n = 4, 426 participants; SMD -0.82, 95% CI -1.45 to -0.18), observer-reported pain (n = 11, 1512 participants; SMD -0.62, 95% CI -1.00 to -0.23) and distress (n = 5, 1067 participants; SMD -0.72, 95% CI -1.41 to -0.03), and behavioral distress (n = 7, 500 participants; SMD -0.44, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.04). Distraction was not efficacious for behavioral pain (n = 4, 309 participants; SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.69 to 0.03). Very low-quality evidence indicated hypnosis was efficacious for reducing self-reported pain (n = 5, 176 participants; SMD -1.40, 95% CI -2.32 to -0.48) and distress (n = 5, 176 participants; SMD -2.53, 95% CI -3.93 to -1.12), and behavioral distress (n = 6, 193 participants; SMD -1.15, 95% CI -1.76 to -0.53), but not behavioral pain (n = 2, 69 participants; SMD -0.38, 95% CI -1.57 to 0.81). No studies assessed hypnosis for observer-reported pain and only one study assessed observer-reported distress. Very low- to low-quality evidence supported the efficacy of combined CBT for observer-reported pain (n = 4, 385 participants; SMD -0.52, 95% CI -0.73 to -0.30) and behavioral distress (n = 11, 1105 participants; SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.67 to -0.14), but not self-reported pain (n = 14, 1359 participants; SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.58 to 0.03), self-reported distress (n = 6, 234 participants; SMD -0.26, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.04), observer-reported distress (n = 6, 765 participants; SMD 0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.50), or behavioral pain (n = 2, 95 participants; SMD -0.65, 95% CI -2.36 to 1.06). Very low-quality evidence showed efficacy of breathing interventions for self-reported pain (n = 4, 298 participants; SMD -1.04, 95% CI -1.86 to -0.22), but there were too few studies for meta-analysis of other outcomes. Very low-quality evidence revealed no effect for preparation/information (n = 4, 313 participants) or suggestion (n = 3, 218 participants) for any pain or distress outcome. Given only a single trial, we could draw no conclusions about memory alteration. Adverse events of respiratory difficulties were only reported in one breathing intervention. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We identified evidence supporting the efficacy of distraction, hypnosis, combined CBT, and breathing interventions for reducing children's needle-related pain or distress, or both. Support for the efficacy of combined CBT and breathing interventions is new from our last review update due to the availability of new evidence. The quality of trials and overall evidence remains low to very low, underscoring the need for improved methodological rigor and trial reporting. Despite low-quality evidence, the potential benefits of reduced pain or distress or both support the evidence in favor of using these interventions in clinical practice.

The effect of a familiar scent on the behavioral and physiological pain responses in neonates.

There are adverse physiologic effects of pain in neonates, and effective pain management must be an essential aspect of neonatal care. In this study we assessed the effect of a nonmaternal familiar scent on the neonatal pain responses. This study included 135 neonates randomly assigned to one of three groups. During arterial puncture, one group was exposed to a vanillin scent on a gauze pad held next to their nose. They were familiarized with it the night before blood sampling by a scented gauze pad placed in the incubator next to their head for an average duration of 8.65 hours. The second group was not familiarized with the scent but was exposed to it during the procedure. The third group was neither familiarized nor exposed to the scent. The duration of crying in the familiar scent group was significantly lower than in the two other groups. Comparison of the physiologic parameters showed less variation in oxygen saturation level during arterial puncture in the familiar scent group. In this study, a familiar scent could reduce crying and oxygen consumption during arterial puncture.

Psychological interventions for needle-related procedural pain and distress in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: This review is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2006. Needle-related procedures are a common source of pain and distress for children. Our previous review on this topic indicated that a number of psychological interventions were efficacious in managing pediatric needle pain, including distraction, hypnosis, and combined cognitive behavioural interventions. Considerable additional research in the area has been published since that time. OBJECTIVES: To provide an update to our 2006 review assessing the efficacy of psychological interventions for needle-related procedural pain and distress in children and adolescents. SEARCH METHODS: Searches of the following databases were conducted for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs): Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; PsycINFO; the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL); and Web of Science. Requests for relevant studies were also posted on various electronic list servers. We ran an updated search in March 2012, and again in March 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: Participants included children and adolescents aged two to 19 years undergoing needle-related procedures. Only RCTs with at least five participants in each study arm comparing a psychological intervention group with a control or comparison group were eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors extracted data and assessed trial quality and a third author helped with data extraction and coding for one non-English study. Included studies were coded for quality using the Cochrane Risk of bias tool. Standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were computed for all analyses using Review Manager 5.2 software. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-nine trials with 3394 participants were included. The most commonly studied needle procedures were venipuncture, intravenous (IV) line insertion, and immunization. Studies included children aged two to 19 years, with the most evidence available for children under 12 years of age. Consistent with the original review, the most commonly studied psychological interventions for needle procedures were distraction, hypnosis, and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). The majority of included studies (19 of 39) examined distraction only. The additional studies from this review update continued to provide strong evidence for the efficacy of distraction and hypnosis. No evidence was available to support the efficacy of preparation and information, combined CBT (at least two or more cognitive or behavioural strategies combined), parent coaching plus distraction, suggestion, or virtual reality for reducing children's pain and distress. No conclusions could be drawn about interventions of memory alteration, parent positioning plus distraction, blowing out air, or distraction plus suggestion, as evidence was available from single studies only. In addition, the Risk of bias scores indicated several domains with high or unclear bias scores (for example, selection, detection, and performance bias) suggesting that the methodological rigour and reporting of RCTs of psychological interventions continue to have considerable room for improvement. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there is strong evidence supporting the efficacy of distraction and hypnosis for needle-related pain and distress in children and adolescents, with no evidence currently available for preparation and information or both, combined CBT, parent coaching plus distraction, suggestion, or virtual reality. Additional research is needed to further assess interventions that have only been investigated in one RCT to date (that is, memory alteration, parent positioning plus distraction, blowing out air, and distraction plus suggestion). There are continuing issues with the quality of trials examining psychological interventions for needle-related pain and distress.

Psychological interventions for needle-related procedural pain and distress in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Needle-related procedures are a common source of pain and distress for children. Several psychological (cognitive-behavioral) interventions to help manage or reduce pain and distress are available; however, a previous comprehensive systematic review of the efficacy of these interventions has not been conducted. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral psychological interventions for needle-related procedural pain and distress in children and adolescents. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) on The Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to 2005), PsycINFO (1887 to 2005), EMBASE (1974 to 2005), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (1982 to 2005), Web of Science (1980 to 2005), and Dissertation-Abstracts International (1980 to 2005). We also searched citation lists and contacted researchers via various electronic list-servers and via email requests. SELECTION CRITERIA: Participants included children and adolescents aged two to 19 years undergoing needle-related procedures. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with at least five participants in each study arm comparing a psychological intervention group with a control or comparison group were eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Included studies were coded for quality using the Oxford Quality Scale devised by Jadad and colleagues. Standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were computed for all analyses using RevMan 4.0 software. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty eight trials with 1951 participants were included. Together, these studies included 1039 participants in treatment conditions and 951 in control conditions. The most commonly studied needle-procedures were immunizations and injections. The largest effect sizes for treatment improvement over control conditions exist for distraction (on self-reported pain, SMD -0.24 (95% CI -0.45 to -0.04), combined cognitive-behavioral interventions--reduced other-reported distress (SMD -0.88, 95% CI -1.65 to -0.12; and behavioral measures of distress (SMD -0.67, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.38) with hypnosis being the most promising--self-reported pain (SMD -1.47, 95% CI -2.67 to -0.27), with promising but limited evidence for the efficacy of numerous other psychological interventions, such as information/preparation, nurse coaching plus distraction, parent positioning plus distraction, and distraction plus suggestion. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there is preliminary evidence that a variety of cognitive-behavioral interventions can be used with children and adolescents to successfully manage or reduce pain and distress associated with needle-related procedures. However, many of the included studies received lower quality scores because they failed to describe the randomization procedure and participant withdrawals or drop-outs from the study. Further RCTs need to be conducted, particularly for the many interventions for which we could not locate any trials.

Os efeitos da música no escolar cardiopata durante a punção venosa: estudo preliminar / Effects of music in children of school-age during the venous puncture: preliminary study

Este trabalho foi realizado com o objetivo de observar os efeitos da música no escolar durante a punção venosa na possibilidade de utilizá-la como terapia complementar...