Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 66
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 8: CD014806, 2023 08 30.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37655530

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Analgesia , Talón , Femenino , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Humanos , Dolor/etiología , Dolor/prevención & control , Glucosa/uso terapéutico , Leche Humana
2.
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak ; 23(1): 226, 2023 10 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37853386

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Computerized clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) can improve care by bridging knowledge to practice gaps. However, the real-world uptake of such systems in health care settings has been suboptimal. We sought to: (1) use the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify determinants (barriers/enablers) of uptake of the Electronic Asthma Management System (eAMS) CDSS; (2) match identified TDF belief statements to elements in the Guideline Implementation with Decision Support (GUIDES) Checklist; and (3) explore the relationship between the TDF and GUIDES frameworks and the usefulness of this sequential approach for identifying opportunities to improve CDSS uptake. METHODS: In Phase 1, we conducted semistructured interviews with primary care physicians in Toronto, Canada regarding the uptake of the eAMS CDSS. Using content analysis, two coders independently analyzed interview transcripts guided by the TDF to generate themes representing barriers and enablers to CDSS uptake. In Phase 2, the same reviewers independently mapped each belief statement to a GUIDES domain and factor. We calculated the proportion of TDF belief statements that linked to each GUIDES domain and the proportion of TDF domains that linked to GUIDES factors (and vice-versa) and domains. RESULTS: We interviewed 10 participants before data saturation. In Phase 1, we identified 53 belief statements covering 12 TDF domains; 18 (34.0%) were barriers, and 35 (66.0%) were enablers. In Phase 2, 41 statements (77.4%) linked to at least one GUIDES factor, while 12 (22.6%) did not link to any specific factor. The GUIDES Context Domain was linked to the largest number of belief statements (19/53; 35.8%). Each TDF domain linked to one or more GUIDES factor, with 6 TDF domains linking to more than 1 factor and 8 TDF domains linking to more than 1 GUIDES domain. CONCLUSIONS: The TDF provides unique insights into barriers and enablers to CDSS uptake, which can then be mapped to GUIDES domains and factors to identify required changes to CDSS context, content, and system. This can be followed by conventional mapping of TDF domains to behaviour change techniques to optimize CDSS implementation. This novel step-wise approach combines two established frameworks to optimize CDSS interventions, and requires prospective validation.


Asunto(s)
Lista de Verificación , Sistemas de Apoyo a Decisiones Clínicas , Humanos , Canadá , Investigación Cualitativa
3.
J Med Internet Res ; 22(10): e19474, 2020 10 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33030437

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Electronic patient questionnaires are becoming ubiquitous in health care. To address care gaps that contribute to poor asthma management, we developed the Electronic Asthma Management System, which includes a previsit electronic patient questionnaire linked to a computerized clinical decision support system. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify the determinants (barriers and enablers) of patient uptake and completion of a previsit mobile health questionnaire. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with adult patients with asthma in Toronto, Canada. After demonstrating the questionnaire, participants completed the questionnaire using their smartphones and were then interviewed regarding perceived barriers and enablers to using and completing the questionnaire. Interview questions were based on the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify the determinants of health-related behavior. We generated themes that addressed the enablers and barriers to the uptake and completion of the questionnaire. RESULTS: In total, 12 participants were interviewed for saturation. Key enablers were as follows: the questionnaire was easy to complete without additional knowledge or skills and was perceived as a priority and responsibility for patients, use could lead to more efficient and personalized care, completion on one's own time would be convenient, and uptake and completion could be optimized through patient reminders. Concerns about data security, the usefulness of questionnaire data, the stress of completing it accurately and on time, competing priorities, and preferences to complete the questionnaire on other devices were the main barriers. CONCLUSIONS: The barriers and enablers identified by patients should be addressed by developing implementation strategies to enhance e-questionnaire use and completion by patients. As the use of e-questionnaires grows, our findings will contribute to implementation efforts across settings and diseases.


Asunto(s)
Asma/epidemiología , Sistemas de Apoyo a Decisiones Clínicas/normas , Adulto , Electrónica , Femenino , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Investigación Cualitativa , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
4.
J Med Internet Res ; 22(9): e19358, 2020 09 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32945779

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: mHealth tablet-based interventions are increasingly being studied and deployed in various health care settings, yet little knowledge exists regarding patient uptake and acceptance or how patient demographics influence these important implementation metrics. OBJECTIVE: To determine which factors influence the uptake and successful completion of an mHealth tablet questionnaire by analyzing its implementation in a primary care setting. METHODS: We prospectively studied a patient-facing electronic touch-tablet asthma questionnaire deployed as part of the Electronic Asthma Management System. We describe tablet uptake and completion rates and corresponding predictor models for these behaviors. RESULTS: The tablet was offered to and accepted by patients in 891/1715 (52.0%) visits. Patients refused the tablet in 33.0% (439/1330) visits in which it was successfully offered. Patients aged older than 65 years of age (odds ratio [OR] 2.30, 95% CI 1.33-3.95) and with concurrent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.05-4.67) were more likely to refuse the tablet, and those on an asthma medication (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.30-0.99) were less likely to refuse it. Once accepted, the questionnaire was completed in 784/891 (88.0%) instances, with those on an asthma medication (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32-0.88) being less likely to leave it incomplete. CONCLUSIONS: Older age predicted initial tablet refusal but not tablet questionnaire completion, suggesting that perceptions of mHealth among older adults may negatively impact uptake, independent of usability. The influence of being on an asthma medication suggests that disease severity may also mediate mHealth acceptance. Although use of mHealth questionnaires is growing rapidly across health care settings and diseases, few studies describe their real-world acceptance and its predictors. Our results should be complemented by qualitative methods to identify barriers and enablers to uptake and may inform technological and implementation strategies to drive successful usage.


Asunto(s)
Asma/diagnóstico , Asma/terapia , Atención Primaria de Salud/métodos , Telemedicina/métodos , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Prospectivos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
5.
CMAJ ; 191(24): E652-E663, 2019 06 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31209132

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Most deaths in critically ill patients with severe traumatic brain injury are associated with a decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatments. We aimed to identify the behavioural determinants that influence recommendations by critical care physicians to consider the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments in this population. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive qualitative study based on the Theoretical Domains Framework of critical care physicians caring for patients with severe traumatic brain injury across Canada. We stratified critical care physicians by regions and used a purposive sampling strategy. We conducted semistructured phone interviews using a piloted and pretested interview guide. We transcribed the interviews verbatim and verified the content for accuracy. We performed the analysis using a 3-step approach: coding, generation of specific beliefs and generation of specific themes. RESULTS: We recruited 20 critical care physicians across 4 geographic regions. After reaching saturation, we identified 7 core themes across 4 Theoretical Domains Framework domains for factors relevant to the decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatments. Four factors (i.e., clinical triggers, social triggers, interaction with families and intentions with medical decisions) were identified before the decision is made and 3 were identified during the decision-making process (i.e., considerations, priorities and knowledge needs). We identified multiple themes reflecting internal (n = 18, 8 Theoretical Domains Framework domains) and external (n = 15, 6 Theoretical Domains Framework domains) influences on the decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatments. INTERPRETATION: We identified several core themes and domains considered by critical care physicians in Canada in the decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatments in critically ill patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Future research should aim at identifying the factors influencing surrogate decision-makers in the decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatments in these patients.


Asunto(s)
Lesiones Traumáticas del Encéfalo , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Cuidados Críticos , Médicos , Privación de Tratamiento , Canadá , Enfermedad Crítica , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Investigación Cualitativa , Índices de Gravedad del Trauma
6.
J Asthma ; 55(11): 1223-1236, 2018 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29261346

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to apply a theory-based approach to identify barriers and enablers to implementing the Alberta Primary Care Asthma Pediatric Pathway (PCAPP) into clinical practice. Phase 1 included an assessment of assumptions underlying the intervention from the perspectives of the developers. Phase 2 determined the perceived barriers and enablers for: 1) primary care physicians' prescribing practices, 2) allied health care professionals' provision of asthma education to parents, and 3) children and parents' adherence to their treatment plans. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with 35 individuals who reside in Alberta, Canada. Phase 1 included three developers. Phase 2 included 11 primary care physicians, 10 allied health care professionals, and 11 parents of children with asthma. Phase 2 interviews were based on the 14 domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Transcribed interviews were analyzed using a directed content analysis. Key assumptions by the developers about the intervention, and beliefs by others about the barriers and enablers of the targeted behaviors were identified. RESULTS: Eight TDF domains mapped onto the assumptions of the pathway as described by the intervention developers. Interviews with health care professionals and parents identified nine TDF domains that influenced the targeted behaviors: knowledge, skills, beliefs about capabilities, social/professional role and identity, beliefs about consequences, environmental context and resources, behavioral regulation, social influences, and emotions. CONCLUSIONS: Barriers and enablers perceived by health care professionals and parents that influenced asthma management will inform the optimization of the PCAPP prior to its evaluation.


Asunto(s)
Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Personal de Salud/organización & administración , Atención Primaria de Salud/organización & administración , Adolescente , Alberta , Asma/terapia , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Niño , Preescolar , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Entrevistas como Asunto , Masculino , Padres , Planificación de Atención al Paciente , Cooperación del Paciente , Educación del Paciente como Asunto/organización & administración , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/organización & administración , Rol Profesional , Autoimagen
7.
BMC Pediatr ; 18(1): 85, 2018 02 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29475433

RESUMEN

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).


Asunto(s)
Analgésicos/administración & dosificación , Dolor Asociado a Procedimientos Médicos/tratamiento farmacológico , Sacarosa/administración & dosificación , Administración Oral , Analgésicos/uso terapéutico , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Femenino , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Masculino , Dimensión del Dolor , Dolor Asociado a Procedimientos Médicos/diagnóstico , Estudios Prospectivos , Método Simple Ciego , Sacarosa/uso terapéutico , Resultado del Tratamiento
8.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 17(1): 68, 2017 01 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28114940

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Niño Hospitalizado , Hospitales Pediátricos , Manejo del Dolor/métodos , Dolor/prevención & control , Adulto , Investigación Biomédica , Canadá/epidemiología , Lista de Verificación , Niño , Niño Hospitalizado/psicología , Estudios Transversales , Práctica Clínica Basada en la Evidencia , Femenino , Hospitales Pediátricos/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Enfermeras y Enfermeros , Manejo del Dolor/normas , Dimensión del Dolor , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Adulto Joven
9.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 7: CD001069, 2016 Jul 16.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27420164

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Analgésicos/administración & dosificación , Dolor/prevención & control , Sacarosa/administración & dosificación , Administración Oral , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Recien Nacido Prematuro , Dolor/fisiopatología , Dimensión del Dolor , Punciones/efectos adversos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
10.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; (5): CD008408, 2015 May 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25942496

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Dulces , Agujas , Dolor/prevención & control , Punciones/efectos adversos , Edulcorantes/administración & dosificación , Adolescente , Factores de Edad , Goma de Mascar , Niño , Preescolar , Humanos , Lactante , Dolor/fisiopatología , Dimensión del Dolor/métodos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Sacarosa/administración & dosificación
11.
Qual Health Res ; 25(6): 763-74, 2015 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25854616

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Actitud del Personal de Salud , Estudios de Evaluación como Asunto , Investigación sobre Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Recien Nacido con Peso al Nacer Extremadamente Bajo/psicología , Unidades de Cuidado Intensivo Neonatal , Dimensión del Dolor/enfermería , Dimensión del Dolor/psicología , Investigación Cualitativa , Proyectos de Investigación , Canadá , Enfermería Basada en la Evidencia/métodos , Edad Gestacional , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Manejo del Dolor/métodos , Manejo del Dolor/enfermería , Centros de Atención Terciaria , Investigación Biomédica Traslacional/estadística & datos numéricos
12.
PLoS One ; 19(3): e0299289, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38427646

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: There is a pressing need for transitional care that prepares rural dwelling medical patients to identify and respond to the signs of worsening health conditions. An evidence-based warning signs intervention has the potential to address this need. While the intervention is predominantly delivered by nurses, other healthcare providers may be required to deliver it in rural communities where human health resources are typically limited. Understanding the perspectives of other healthcare providers likely to be involved in delivering the intervention is a necessary first step to avert consequences of low acceptability, such as poor intervention implementation, uptake, and effectiveness. This study examined and compared nurses' and other healthcare providers' perceived acceptability of an evidence-based warning signs intervention proposed for rural transitional care. METHODS: A cross-sectional design was used. The convenience sample included 45 nurses and 32 other healthcare providers (e.g., physical and occupational therapists, physicians) who self-identified as delivering transitional care to patients in rural Ontario, Canada. In an online survey, participants were presented with a description of the warning signs intervention and completed established measures of intervention acceptability. The measures captured 10 intervention acceptability attributes (effectiveness, appropriateness, risk, convenience, relevance, applicability, usefulness, frequency of current use, likelihood of future use, and confidence in ability to deliver the intervention). Ratings ≥ 2 indicated acceptability. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, independent samples t-tests, as well as effect sizes to quantify the magnitude of any differences in acceptability ratings between nurses and other healthcare providers. RESULTS: Nurses and other healthcare providers rated all intervention attributes > 2, except the attributes of convenience and frequency of current use. Differences between the two groups were found for only three attributes: nurses' ratings were significantly higher than other healthcare providers on perceived applicability, frequency of current use, and the likelihood of future use of the intervention (all p's < .007; effect sizes .58 - .68, respectively). DISCUSSION: The results indicate that both participant groups had positive perspectives of the intervention on most of the attributes and suggest that initiatives to enhance the convenience of the intervention's implementation are warranted to support its widespread adoption in rural transitional care. However, the results also suggest that other healthcare providers may be less receptive to the intervention in practice. Future research is needed to explore and mitigate the possible reasons for low ratings on perceived convenience and frequency of current use of the intervention, as well as the between group differences on perceived applicability, frequency of current use, and the likelihood of future use of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention represents a tenable option for rural transitional care in Ontario, Canada, and possibly other jurisdictions emphasizing transitional care.


Asunto(s)
Hospitales Rurales , Cuidado de Transición , Humanos , Estudios Transversales , Población Rural , Personal de Salud , Ontario
13.
BMJ Paediatr Open ; 8(1)2024 Jul 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38986541

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Oral sucrose is repeatedly administered to neonates in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) to treat pain from commonly performed procedures; however, there is limited evidence on its long-term cumulative effect on neurodevelopment. We examined the association between total sucrose volumes administered to preterm neonates for pain mitigation in the NICU and their neurodevelopment at 18 months of corrected age (CA). METHODS: A prospective longitudinal single-arm observational study that enrolled hospitalised preterm neonates <32 weeks of gestational age at birth and <10 days of life was conducted in four level III NICUs in Canada. Neonates received 0.1 mL of 24% sucrose 2 min prior to all commonly performed painful procedures during their NICU stay. Neurodevelopment was assessed at 18 months of CA using the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (Bayley-III). Multiple neonatal and maternal factors known to affect development were adjusted for in the generalised linear model analysis. RESULTS: 172 preterm neonates were enrolled and 118 were included in the analysis at 18 months of CA. The total mean sucrose volume administered/neonate/NICU stay was 5.96 (±5.6) mL, and the mean Bayley-III composite scores were: cognitive 91 (±17), language 86 (±18) and motor 88 (±18). There was no association between Bayley-III scores and the total sucrose volume: cognitive (p=0.57), language (p=0.42) and motor (p=0.70). CONCLUSION: Cumulative sucrose exposure for repeated procedural pain in preterm neonates was neither associated with a delay in neurodevelopment nor neuroprotective effects at 18 months of CA. If sucrose is used, we suggest the minimally effective dose combined with other non-pharmacological interventions with demonstrated effectiveness such as skin-to-skin contact, non-nutritive sucking, facilitated tucking and swaddling. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02725814.


Asunto(s)
Recien Nacido Prematuro , Unidades de Cuidado Intensivo Neonatal , Dolor Asociado a Procedimientos Médicos , Sacarosa , Humanos , Sacarosa/administración & dosificación , Estudios Prospectivos , Recién Nacido , Femenino , Masculino , Recien Nacido Prematuro/crecimiento & desarrollo , Estudios Longitudinales , Lactante , Dolor Asociado a Procedimientos Médicos/prevención & control , Dolor Asociado a Procedimientos Médicos/etiología , Desarrollo Infantil/efectos de los fármacos , Desarrollo Infantil/fisiología , Canadá , Administración Oral
14.
Paediatr Neonatal Pain ; 6(1): 10-18, 2024 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38504869

RESUMEN

Although sucrose is widely administered to hospitalized infants for single painful procedures, total sucrose volume during the entire neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) stay and associated adverse events are unknown. In a longitudinal observation study, we aimed to quantify and contextualize sucrose administration during the NICU stay. Specifically, we investigated the frequency, nature, and severity of painful procedures; proportion of procedures where neonates received sucrose; total volume of sucrose administered for painful procedures; and incidence and type of adverse events. Neonates <32 weeks gestational age at birth and <10 days of life were recruited from four Canadian tertiary NICUs. Daily chart reviews of documented painful procedures, sucrose administration, and any associated adverse events were undertaken. One hundred sixty-eight neonates underwent a total of 9093 skin-breaking procedures (mean 54.1 [±65.2] procedures/neonate or 1.1 [±0.9] procedures/day/neonate) during an average NICU stay of 45.9 (±31.4) days. Pain severity was recorded for 5399/9093 (59.4%) of the painful procedures; the majority (5051 [93.5%]) were heel lances of moderate pain intensity. Sucrose was administered for 7839/9093 (86.2%) of painful procedures. The total average sucrose volume was 5.5 (±5.4) mL/neonate or 0.11 (±0.08) mL/neonate/day. Infants experienced an average of 7.9 (±12.7) minor adverse events associated with pain and/or sucrose administration that resolved without intervention. The total number of painful procedures, sucrose volume, and incidence of adverse events throughout the NICU stay were described addressing an important knowledge gap in neonatal pain. These data provide a baseline for examining the association between total sucrose volume during NICU stay and research on longer-term behavioral and neurodevelopmental outcomes.

15.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; (1): CD001069, 2013 Jan 31.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23440783

RESUMEN

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 and safety of oral sucrose for relieving procedural pain in neonates. SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. Electronic and manual searches were performed in November 2011 for published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in MEDLINE (1950 to November 2011), EMBASE (1980 to 2011), CINAHL (1982 to November 2011) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library). We did not impose language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs in which term, preterm, or both term and preterm neonates (postnatal age maximum of 28 days after reaching 40 weeks' postmenstrual age) received sucrose for procedural pain. Control conditions included no treatment, water, pacifier, positioning/containing or breastfeeding. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Main outcome measures were physiological, behavioural, or both pain indicators with or without composite pain scores. A mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed-effect model was reported for continuous outcome measures. Trial quality was assessed as per The Cochrane Collaboration MAIN RESULTS: Fifty-seven studies enrolling 4730 infants were included. Results from only a few studies could be combined in meta-analyses. When Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) scores were pooled, sucrose groups had significantly lower scores at 30 seconds (weighted mean difference (WMD) -1.76; 95% CI -2.54 to - 0.97; 4 trials; 264 neonates] and 60 seconds (WMD -2.05; 95% CI -3.08 to -1.02; 3 trials' 195 neonates) post-heel lance. For retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) examinations, sucrose did not significantly reduce PIPP scores (WMD -0.65; 95% CI -1.88 to 0.59; 3 trials; 82 neonates). There were no differences in adverse effects between sucrose and control groups. Sucrose significantly reduced duration of total crying time (WMD -39 seconds; 95% CI -44 to -34; 2 trials; 88 neonates), but did not reduce duration of first cry during heel lance (WMD -9 seconds; 95% CI -20 to 2; 3 trials; 192 neonates). Oxygen saturation (%) was significantly lower in infants given sucrose during ROP examination compared to controls (WMD -2.6; 95% CI -4.9 to - 0.2; 2 trials; 62 neonates). Results of individual trials that could not be incorporated in meta-analyses supported these findings. The effects of sucrose on long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes are unknown. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Sucrose is safe and effective for reducing procedural pain from single events. An optimal dose could not be identified due to inconsistency in effective sucrose dosage among studies. Further investigation on repeated administration of sucrose in neonates and the use of sucrose in combination with other non-pharmacological and 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.


Asunto(s)
Analgésicos/administración & dosificación , Dolor/prevención & control , Sacarosa/administración & dosificación , Administración Oral , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Recien Nacido Prematuro , Dolor/fisiopatología , Dimensión del Dolor , Punciones , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
16.
Front Pain Res (Lausanne) ; 4: 1110502, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36824315

RESUMEN

Goal: To determine the analgesic effectiveness of repeated sucrose administration for skin-breaking (SB) procedures over the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) hospitalization of preterm infants. Methods: Longitudinal observational study, conducted in four level III Canadian NICUs. Eligible infants were <32 weeks gestational age at birth, and <10 days of life at enrollment. Infants received 24% sucrose (0.12 ml) prior to all painful procedures. The Premature Infant Pain Profile - Revised (PIPP-R) was used at 30 and 60 seconds after a medically-required SB procedure as soon as possible after enrollment and weekly up to three additional times for scheduled procedures. Results: 172 infants (57.3% male, gestational age 28.35 (±2.31) weeks) were included. The mean 30 s PIPP-R scores were 6.11 (±3.68), 5.76 (±3.41), 6.48 (±3.67), and 6.81 (±3.69) respectively; there were no statistically significant interactions of study site by time (p = 0.31) or over time (p = 0.15). At 60 s, mean PIPP-R scores were 6.05 (±4.09), 5.74 (±3.67), 6.19 (±3.7), and 5.99 (±3.76) respectively; there were no study site by time interactions (p = 0.14) or differences over time (p = 0.52). There was a statistically significant site difference in the effectiveness of sucrose at 30 and 60 seconds (p < 0.01). Conclusions: Consistently low PIPP-R scores following a skin-breaking procedure indicated that the analgesic effectiveness of the minimal dose of sucrose was sustained over time in the NICU. Further research is required to determine the optimal combination of sucrose and other pain management strategies to improve clinical practice and the impact of consistent use of repeated use of sucrose on neurodevelopment.

17.
Implement Sci ; 17(1): 21, 2022 03 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35272667

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Computerized clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) are a promising knowledge translation tool, but often fail to meaningfully influence the outcomes they target. Low CDSS provider uptake is a potential contributor to this problem but has not been systematically studied. The objective of this systematic review and meta-regression was to determine reported CDSS uptake and identify which CDSS features may influence uptake. METHODS: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Database of Controlled Trials were searched from January 2000 to August 2020. Randomized, non-randomized, and quasi-experimental trials reporting CDSS uptake in any patient population or setting were included. The main outcome extracted was CDSS uptake, reported as a raw proportion, and representing the number of times the CDSS was used or accessed over the total number of times it could have been interacted with. We also extracted context, content, system, and implementation features that might influence uptake, for each CDSS. Overall weighted uptake was calculated using random-effects meta-analysis and determinants of uptake were investigated using multivariable meta-regression. RESULTS: Among 7995 citations screened, 55 studies involving 373,608 patients and 3607 providers met full inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis revealed that overall CDSS uptake was 34.2% (95% CI 23.2 to 47.1%). Uptake was only reported in 12.4% of studies that otherwise met inclusion criteria. Multivariable meta-regression revealed the following factors significantly associated with uptake: (1) formally evaluating the availability and quality of the patient data needed to inform CDSS advice; and (2) identifying and addressing other barriers to the behaviour change targeted by the CDSS. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: System uptake was seldom reported in CDSS trials. When reported, uptake was low. This represents a major and potentially modifiable barrier to overall CDSS effectiveness. We found that features relating to CDSS context and implementation strategy best predicted uptake. Future studies should measure the impact of addressing these features as part of the CDSS implementation strategy. Uptake reporting must also become standard in future studies reporting CDSS intervention effects. REGISTRATION: Pre-registered on PROSPERO, CRD42018092337.


Asunto(s)
Sistemas de Apoyo a Decisiones Clínicas , Humanos
18.
Chest ; 161(4): 888-905, 2022 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34740591

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Although guidelines long have recommended objective pulmonary function testing to diagnose asthma and COPD, many primary care patients receive a clinical diagnosis of asthma or COPD without objective testing. This often leads to unnecessary treatment with associated incremental costs and side effects and delays actual diagnosis. RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the barriers and enablers to lung function testing for asthma, COPD, or both in primary care? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We searched the literature for qualitative and quantitative studies reporting barriers, enablers, or both to in-office or out-of-office lung function testing for diagnosing asthma, COPD, or both in primary care. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full texts, assessed methodologic quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, and extracted data from included studies. Identified barriers and enablers were categorized using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), applying a pre-established coding manual. RESULTS: We identified 7,988 unique articles, reviewed 336 full-text articles, and included 18 studies in this systematic review. Of these 18, 12 were quantitative, three were qualitative, and three used mixed methods. All 18 addressed in-office testing and 11 also addressed out-of-office testing. Barriers and enablers overlapped for asthma and COPD, and in-office and out-of-office settings. We identified more reported barriers (eg, lack of knowledge of the usefulness of spirometry) than enablers (eg, skills for performing reliable spirometry). Barriers mapped to nine (of a possible 14) TDF domains (for both in-office and out-of-office settings). Enablers mapped to three domains for in-office testing and five domains for out-of-office testing. INTERPRETATION: Barriers to objective testing for airway disease in primary care are complex and span many theoretical domains. Correspondingly, a successful intervention must leverage multiple behavior change techniques. A theory-based, multifaceted intervention to address underuse of diagnostic testing for asthma or COPD now should be developed and tested.


Asunto(s)
Asma , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica , Asma/diagnóstico , Atención a la Salud , Humanos , Atención Primaria de Salud , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/diagnóstico , Investigación Cualitativa
19.
CMAJ ; 183(7): E403-10, 2011 Apr 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21464171

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Children being cared for in hospital undergo multiple painful procedures daily. However, little is known about the frequency of these procedures and associated interventions to manage the pain. We undertook this study to determine, for children in Canadian hospitals, the frequency of painful procedures, the types of pain management interventions associated with painful procedures and the influence of the type of hospital unit on procedural pain management. METHODS: We reviewed medical charts for infants and children up to 18 years of age who had been admitted to 32 inpatient units at eight Canadian pediatric hospitals between October 2007 and April 2008. We recorded all of the painful procedures performed and the pain management interventions that had been implemented in the 24-hour period preceding data collection. We performed descriptive and comparative (analysis of variance, χ(2)) analyses. RESULTS: Of the 3822 children included in the study, 2987 (78.2%) had undergone at least one painful procedure in the 24-hour period preceding data collection, for a total of 18 929 painful procedures (mean 6.3 per child who had any painful procedure). For 2334 (78.1%) of the 2987 children who had a painful procedure, a pain management intervention in the previous 24 hours was documented in the chart: 1980 (84.8%) had a pharmacologic intervention, 609 (26.1%) a physical intervention, 584 (25.0%) a psychologic intervention and 753 (32.3%) a combination of interventions. However, for only 844 (28.3%) of the 2987 children was one or more pain management interventions administered and documented specifically for a painful procedure. Pediatric intensive care units reported the highest proportion of painful procedures and analgesics administered. INTERPRETATION: For less than one-third of painful procedures was there documentation of one or more specific pain management interventions. Strategies for implementing changes in pain management must be tailored to the type of hospital unit.


Asunto(s)
Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Dolor/epidemiología , Adolescente , Analgésicos/uso terapéutico , Análisis de Varianza , Canadá/epidemiología , Distribución de Chi-Cuadrado , Niño , Preescolar , Cuidados Críticos/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Hospitales Pediátricos/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Lactante , Masculino , Dolor/etiología , Dolor/prevención & control , Estadísticas no Paramétricas
20.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; (10): CD008408, 2011 Oct 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21975781

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Large numbers of studies have shown that oral sucrose or glucose, with or without non-nutritive sucking given prior to painful procedures result in a significant reduction in behavioral pain responses during or following painful procedures compared with placebo, no treatment or non-nutritive sucking alone, in newborns and infants up to 12 months of age. It is not known if these pain-reducing effects exist for older infants and children one year to 16 years of age. 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 STRATEGY: We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CCTR), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ACP Journal Club, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and on the EBSCOhost interface: CINAHL. We applied no language or document type restrictions. We used the standard methods of The Cochrane Collaboration. The last date of the search was June 30, 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which children from one year up to 16 years of age, received a sweet tasting solution or substance for needle-related procedural pain. Control conditions included water, non-sweet tasting substances, pacifier, distraction, no treatment, positioning/containment or breastfeeding. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Outcome measures included composite pain scores, physiological or behavioral pain indicators, self-report of pain or parental- or healthcare professional-report of child's pain. We reported mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using fixed-effect or random-effects models as appropriate for continuous outcome measures. We planned to report risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD) for dichotomous outcomes. We used the Chi(2) test and I(2) statistic to assess between-study heterogeneity. MAIN RESULTS: We included four studies (330 participants). Two studies focused on toddlers and pre-school children receiving sucrose for immunization pain compared with water or no treatment and two studies included school-aged children receiving sweet or unsweetened chewing gum before, or, before and during immunization and blood collection. Results for the toddlers/pre-school children were conflicting. Participants in the sucrose group in one study had significantly lower cry duration and behavioral pain scores, compared with the no intervention group, while crying time did not differ between the sucrose and the no intervention group in the other study. For school-aged children, chewing sweet gum either before, or during the procedure, did not significantly reduce pain scores. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on these four studies, two of which were subgroups of small numbers of eligible toddlers from larger studies, there is insufficient evidence of the analgesic effects of sweet tasting solutions or substances during acute painful procedures in children over one year of age. Further well-conducted RCTs are warranted in this population.


Asunto(s)
Goma de Mascar , Agujas , Dolor/prevención & control , Punciones/efectos adversos , Edulcorantes/administración & dosificación , Adolescente , Factores de Edad , Niño , Preescolar , Humanos , Lactante , Dolor/fisiopatología , Dimensión del Dolor/métodos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Sacarosa/administración & dosificación
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA