Pain management associated with arteriovenous fistula cannulation among children undergoing haemodialysis: Systematic review.

Objective: To evaluate studies related to pain management associated with arteriovenous fistula cannulation among children. METHODS: The systematic review comprised literature search on Embase, ProQuest, Science Direct, Scopus, SpringerLink and Wiley Online databases for studies published in English between 1998 and 2021. The search used key words, including pain management OR analgesia AND child OR paediatric AND haemodialysis OR dialysis AND arteriovenous fistula OR arteriovenous fistula cannulation OR fistula needle OR arteriovenous fistula insertion OR needle insertion. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Joana Briggs Institute checklist. General characteristics of the and pain outcomes were noted. RESULTS: Of the 2,877 studies initially identified, 8(0.27%) were analysed; 7(87.5%) quasi-experimental and 1(12.5%) randomised controlled trial. Overall, there were 283 participants aged 6-18 years. The strategies used for reducing arteriovenous fistula puncture-related pain among children undergoing haemodialysis included cryotherapy, lidocaine agents, virtual reality (VR), guided visualisation, balloon inflation, aromatherapy, and other programmed distractions. The strategies had a positive effect on reducing arteriovenous fistula cannulation-related pain among children. Conclusion: Non-pharmacological pain management is an easier, simpler, inexpensive and more effective method of atraumatic care among children undergoing haemodialysis.

Pediatric Procedural Sedation.

Pediatric procedural sedation (PPS), formerly known as conscious sedation, is often used outside the operating room for various procedures. Twenty years ago, nearly all cases of PPS were performed by pediatric intensivists, dentists, emergency medicine physicians, and anesthesiologists, due to the urgent nature of procedures in their settings. However, with the emergence of pediatric hospital medicine as a board-certified subspecialty, many children's hospitals have created dedicated PPS teams. These teams, composed of highly trained physicians and ancillary staff, are well-suited for procedures, quality measures, and multidisciplinary care. The wider availability of sedation outside the operating room allows other pediatric subspecialties, such as surgery and oncology, to use PPS in ensuring safe and timely interventions for their patients. This article will cover PPS as an alternative to anesthesia for otherwise healthy children and aim to answer frequent questions that arise regarding medications, risks, and candidacy for PPS. [Pediatr Ann. 2024;53(9):e324-e329.].

Impact of virtual reality on peri-interventional pain, anxiety and distress in a pediatric oncology outpatient clinic: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Pain and anxiety-inducing interventions have a major impact on pediatric patients. Pain reduction by virtual reality (VR) during port and vein punctures is well studied. This study investigates peri-interventional reduction of pain, anxiety and distress using VR compared to the standard of care (SOC) in a pediatric oncology outpatient clinic. METHODS: In a randomized, controlled cross-over design, patients aged 6-18 years experience potentially painful interventions accompanied by VR. Observational instruments include NRS, FPS-r, BAADS, mYPAS-SF, PedsQL and SSKJ3-8R. All patients undergo two observations: SOC (A) and VR (B) in a randomized order. In addition, parents and staff are interviewed. Specific conditions for VR in an outpatient clinic setting derived from interprofessional focus group discussion are being explored. RESULTS: Between July 2021 and December 2022 57 eligible patients were included and randomized to the orders A/B (n = 28) and B/A (n = 29). Thirty-eight patients completed both observations. Characteristics in both groups did not differ significantly. More than half of the patients had no previous experience with VR, 5% decided to discontinue VR prematurely. Peri-interventional pain, anxiety and distress were significantly reduced by VR compared with SOC. 71% of patients and 76% of parents perceived punctures with VR to be more relaxed than previous ones. 95% of patients perceived fun with VR goggles. Detailed questionnaires on individual stress and anxiety were returned from 26 of 38 patients. Focus group discussion with staff yielded evidence for successful implementation of VR in an outpatient clinic. CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that VR can be used for peri-interventional reduction of pain, anxiety, and distress in the special environment of a pediatric outpatient clinic. Specific conditions must be met for successful implementation. Further studies are needed to identify particularly susceptible patients and to illuminate alternatives for distraction that are feasible to implement with limited resources. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: (ClinicalTrials.gov ID): NCT06235723; 01/02/2024; retrospectively registered. This study adheres to the standard checklist of CONSORT guidelines.

[Virtual reality in the outpatient: reducing anxiety and fear in venous puncture]. / Realidad virtual en el paciente ambulatorio: reduciendo la ansiedad y el miedo en la punción de vías venosas.

Up to 80% of children admitted to a hospital experience pain, mainly associated with venipuncture. OBJECTIVE: To analyze whether the use of virtual reality (VR) headsets during venipuncture can modify the perception of pain, anxiety, and fear in pediatrics. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Open label, randomized clinical trial. The presence of intellectual, visual, or hearing impairment were considered exclusion criteria. Two anxiety and fear scales were administered before and after the procedure, and the Wong-Baker face pain scale at the end. The following were recorded: number of venipuncture attempts, duration of the procedure, and side effects. RESULTS: 78 patients were included, 38 males and a mean age of 9.63 years. In the intervention group, the mean pain value was 2.87, with a mean difference (MD) of -0.85 compared with the control one (95% confidence interval (CI) -2.02 to 0.33). There was a significant reduction in the level of anxiety and fear, with MDs of -2.59 (95%CI: -3.92 to -1.26) and -0.85 points (95%CI: -1.45 to -0.24), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: the use of VR headsets in venipuncture in hospital daytime care decreases the level of anxiety and fear in children and seems to reduce pain, without adverse effects. The venipuncture procedure has the same success rate and does not increase its duration.

The Effect of Swaddling and Oropharyngeal Colostrum During Endotracheal Suctioning on Procedural Pain and Comfort in Premature Neonates: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Endotracheal suctioning (ES) is a painful procedure frequently performed in the neonatal intensive care unit. This procedure negatively affects the comfort level of premature neonates. PURPOSE: To determine the effect of 2 nonpharmacologic methods, swaddling and the administration of oropharyngeal colostrum, on the pain and comfort levels of preterm neonates during ES. METHODS: This randomized controlled experimental study comprised 48 intubated premature neonates (swaddling group n = 16; oropharyngeal colostrum group n = 16; and control group n = 16) at 26 to 37 weeks of gestation. The neonates were swaddled with a white soft cotton cloth or administered 0.4 mL of oropharyngeal colostrum 2 minutes before ES, according to the group in which they were included. Two observers evaluated the pain levels (Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revize [PIPP-R]) and comfort (Newborn Comfort Behavior Scale [COMFORTneo]) of the infants by observing video recordings of before, during, and after the procedure. FINDINGS/RESULTS: A significantly lower mean PIPP-R score was found in the swaddling group during ES compared with the control group ( P = .002). The mean COMFORTneo scores of the swaddling and oropharyngeal colostrum groups during ES ( P < .01, P = .002) and the mean PIPP-R and COMFORTneo scores immediately after ES and 5, 10, and 15 minutes later were significantly lower than the control group ( P < .005). IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE AND RESEARCH: Swaddling was effective both during and after the procedure, while oropharyngeal colostrum was effective only after the procedure in reducing ES-related pain in premature neonates. Swaddling and oropharyngeal colostrum were effective in increasing comfort both during and after the procedure.

Distracting children with virtual reality during otomicroscopy: A randomised control trial.

OBJECTIVES: Virtual Reality (VR) is a successful distraction method for reducing procedure-related pain in children, though it has never been studied during otomicroscopy. Therefore, we investigated the efficacy of VR as a distraction method during otomicroscopy. METHODS: This Randomised Control Trial (RCT) included 60 children aged 4-15 years. The patients were randomised to receive distraction by VR, tablet, or no distraction. Procedure-related pain was scored by patients and compared with previous examinations. RESULTS: Patients' experience with otomicroscopy was significantly improved with VR compared to tablet (p < 0.05) and no distraction (p < 0.01). Pain scores did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSION: VR did not reduce pain scores, but it improved the children's experience with otomicroscopy without causing significant adverse outcomes.

Gel instillation sonohysterography (GIS) using Endosgel versus ExEmgel, comparison of pain and image quality and cost benefit analysis: A double blind randomised controlled trial. GISPAIN trial.

INTRODUCTION: Pain experience, physical reaction, image quality and adverse events during Gel Instillation Sonohysterography (GIS) can differ using gels with different compositions. As a result, patient satisfaction can also be affected. The effect of two instillation gels, Endosgel versus ExEmgel, using both the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and a Continuous Pain Score Meter (CPSM) was therefore compared. METHODS: This single centre double blind randomised controlled trial included 80 women planned for outpatient GIS, diagnosed with abnormal intrauterine bleeding or fertility disorders and suspicion on an intrauterine abnormality. Patients were randomly allocated to the instillation of Endosgel containing chlorhexidine or ExEmgel without chlorhexidine. Primary outcome was reported pain during the procedure using VAS. Secondary outcomes included pain score measured using CPSM, satisfaction to the procedure and preference at 3 weeks and 3 months after the procedure and image quality. A cost benefit analysis was also performed. RESULTS: The reported median VAS concerning pain during gel instillation was comparable in the Endosgel and ExEmgel group, 2.50 (IQR 0.00-5.00) and 2.00 (IQR 0.00-5.75) respectively (p = 0.69). The median VAS of the entire procedure was also similar: both 2.00 (IQR 0.00-5.00) (p = 0.86). CPSM-scores were not significantly different either. Both groups were similar in image quality (p = 0.83) and patient's satisfaction (p = 0.36). CONCLUSION: Concerning the pain experienced during a GIS procedure and patients' satisfaction, the ExEmgel was not proven to be superior to the Endosgel. Our advice is to use the gel that is available at the lowest costs, as the image quality is the same for both Endosgel and ExEmgel.

Intranasal midazolam for procedural distress in children in the emergency department: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Intranasal (IN) midazolam is the most common anxiolytic for children in the emergency department (ED), but evidence of benefit is conflicting. We synthesized the evidence on IN midazolam for procedural distress in children undergoing ED painful procedures. METHODS: We included trials involving painful ED procedures in children 0-18 years involving IN midazolam. Primary outcome was procedural distress. We summarized results using Tricco et al.'s classification of "neutral" (p ≥ 0.05), "favorable," and "unfavorable" (p < 0.05), supporting IN midazolam or comparator, respectively, or "indeterminate" (unable to judge). Where possible, we pooled results using meta-analysis. Methodologic quality of evidence was evaluated using Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool and GRADE system. RESULTS: We included 41 trials (n = 2973 participants). Thirty trials involved intravenous insertion. IN midazolam was superior to placebo (RR = 7.2; 95% CI: 3.43, 15.25; 3 trials; I2 = 0%). However, 56-90% of the IN midazolam group resisted the procedure. Focusing on the three trials that used validated measures, IN midazolam was "neutral" versus IN ketamine and either "neutral" or "unfavorable" versus IN dexmedetomidine. There was no difference in the proportion of children with a satisfactory distress score between IN midazolam and oral midazolam (RR = 1.1; 95% CI: 0.74, 1.73; 2 trials; I2 = 53%), IN ketamine (RR = 1.1; 95% CI: 0.91, 1.25; 6 trials; I2 = 0%), or IN dexmedetomidine (RR = 0.4; 95% CI: 0.17, 1.05; 3 trials; I2 = 84%). Ten trials involved laceration repair. IN midazolam was "favorable" versus placebo; however, both groups scored in the anxious range. There was no difference in distress between IN midazolam and oral midazolam (SMD = 0.01; 95% CI:-0.32, 0.34; 2 trials; I2 = 0%) (Fig. 3E) [64,65]. Using validated instruments, IN midazolam was "unfavorable" versus IN dexmedetomidine but "favorable" versus oral diazepam and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited methodologically rigorous evidence that IN midazolam is better than placebo for IV insertion and laceration repair. At the doses studied, preliminary evidence suggests that IN dexmedetomidine may be superior to IN midazolam for both IV insertion and laceration repair.

ABSTRAIT: OBJECTIFS: Le midazolam intranasal (IN) est l'anxiolytique le plus courant chez les enfants du service des urgences (DE), mais les preuves des avantages sont contradictoires. Nous avons synthétisé les preuves sur l'IN midazolam pour la détresse procédurale chez les enfants subissant des procédures douloureuses d'urgence. MéTHODES: Nous avons inclus des essais impliquant des procédures douloureuses d'urgence chez les enfants de 0 à 18 ans impliquant IN midazolam. Le résultat principal était la détresse procédurale. Nous avons résumé les résultats en utilisant la classification de Tricco et coll. de « neutre ¼ (p 0,05), « favorable ¼, « défavorable ¼ (p < 0,05), à l'appui du midazolam IN ou du comparateur, respectivement, ou « indéterminé ¼ (incapable de juger). Dans la mesure du possible, nous avons regroupé les résultats en utilisant la méta-analyse. La qualité méthodologique des preuves a été évaluée à l'aide de l'outil de risque de biais de Cochrane Collaboration et du système GRADE. RéSULTATS: Nous avons inclus 41 essais (n = 2973 participants). Trente essais portaient sur l'insertion intraveineuse. L'IN midazolam était supérieur au placebo (RR = 7,2; IC à 95 % : 3,43,15,25; 3 essais; I2 = 0 %). Cependant, 56 à 90 % du groupe IN midazolam a résisté à la procédure. En se concentrant sur les trois essais qui ont utilisé des mesures validées, IN midazolam était « neutre ¼ par rapport à IN kétamine et « neutre ¼ ou « défavorable ¼ par rapport à IN dexmedetomidine. Il n'y avait pas de différence dans la proportion d'enfants ayant un score de détresse satisfaisant entre IN midazolam et midazolam oral (RR = 1,1; IC à 95 % : 0,74,1,73; 2 essais; I2 = 53 %), IN kétamine (RR = 1,1; IC à 95 % : 0,91,1,25; 6 essais; I2 = 0 %) ou IN dexmedetomidine (RR = 0,4; IC à 95 % : 0,17,1,05; 3 essais; I2 = 84 %). Dix essais portaient sur la réparation de la lacération. L'IN midazolam était « favorable ¼ par rapport au placebo, mais les deux groupes ont obtenu des résultats dans la fourchette de l'anxiété. Il n'y avait pas de différence de détresse entre le midazolam IN et le midazolam oral (SMD = 0,01; IC à 95 %:-0,32,0,34; 2 essais; I2 = 0 %) (figure 3E)64,65. À l'aide d'instruments validés, l'IN midazolam était « défavorable ¼ par rapport à l'IN dexmedetomidine, mais « favorable ¼ par rapport au diazépam oral et au placebo. CONCLUSION: Il y a peu de preuves méthodologiques rigoureuses que l'IN midazolam est meilleur que le placebo pour l'insertion IV et la réparation de lacération. Aux doses étudiées, des preuves préliminaires suggèrent que l'IN dexmedetomidine peut être supérieure à l'IN midazolam pour l'insertion IV et la réparation de lacération.

Effectiveness of ShotBlocker application on reducing the pain of needle-related procedures in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PROBLEM: Needle-related procedures are quite common throughout life, especially during childhood. Pain caused by these procedures is the most common complication. ShotBlocker is an alternative non-pharmacological method to reduce pain during injection-related procedures. However, the effectiveness of the ShotBlocker application in children for reducing pain needle-related procedures remains unclear. This review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of ShotBlocker application on pain during needle-related procedures in children from Randomized Controlled Trials. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Eight electronic databases were searched until November 2023 for articles published in English. The methodological quality and evidence strength were appraised using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the GRADE approach. A random-effects model was used to determine the effect of the ShotBlocker application on pain levels. The review included results involving assessments from the child, parents, and an observer in pain evaluation. SAMPLE: A total of nine studies with 1205 children patients were included. RESULTS: The evaluation data showed that ShotBlocker application significantly reduced the pain caused by needle-related procedures in children. The Cochrane GRADE approach showed moderate level evidence for the effect of ShotBlocker application on pain during needle procedures. CONCLUSIONS: As a result of the studies included in this meta-analysis, it was determined that ShotBlocker application significantly reduced the pain caused by needle-related procedures in children. IMPLICATIONS: ShotBlocker, a non-pharmacological method, can be used by pediatric nurses to reduce pain during needle-related procedures in children. Randomized controlled studies with well-designed methods are needed to create strong evidence in this field.

Strategies to minimize procedure-related pain and anxiety: lessons from pediatric dermatology.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Recent studies have suggested that prolonged or repeated episodes of general anesthesia early in childhood may adversely affect neurodevelopment. This, combined with rising healthcare costs and decreasing access, has sparked interest in performing pediatric procedures in the office setting when possible. It is essential to address the physical and psychological discomfort that often accompany this experience, particularly in children. RECENT FINDINGS: Healthcare providers performing procedures on children can draw from a spectrum of established techniques, new technology, and novel use of medications to decrease peri-procedural pain and anxiety. These techniques include distraction, optimization of local anesthesia, and mild to moderate sedation. SUMMARY: We recommend using a combination of techniques to minimize pain and anxiety to improve safety, decrease healthcare costs, improve patient experience, and prevent childhood trauma and persistent negative perception of the healthcare system.

Non-pharmacological interventions to reduce procedural needle pain in children (6-12 years): A systematic review.

PROBLEM: Children of different age groups frequently undergo painful procedures involving needles, which can be a source of significant discomfort. Regrettably, this aspect of care often receives insufficient attention from healthcare professionals. The existing literature proposes several methodologies for managing procedural pain, with nonpharmacological techniques being particularly promising. These techniques should be adapted to the patient's age, but literature predominantly emphasizes their use with infants. Thus, it is necessary to evaluate their effectiveness in diverse age groups. Consequently, the purpose of this systematic review is to identify non-pharmacological interventions used to prevent needle-related procedural pain in children (age group 6-12 years). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Primary studies in English language on non-pharmacological interventions in children aged 6-12 years undergoing needle-related procedures found on PubMed, CINAHL and Embase. SAMPLE: A total of 18 studies were included. RESULTS: The results indicate the potential application of various non-pharmacological techniques, with distraction methods standing out. These techniques include activities like utilizing cards, watching cartoons, employing virtual reality and playing video games. CONCLUSIONS: Children's procedural pain represents a significant challenge in treatment plans. Literature offers several approaches, including nonpharmacologic methods, to control this problem. Prioritizing procedural pain management is critical both at clinical and organizational levels to improve the quality of pediatric care. IMPLICATIONS: These findings offer different options to support clinical practice, holding the potential to enhance the quality of patient care.

Unsedated colonoscopy utilizing virtual reality distraction: a pilot-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Sedation increases colonoscopy risks and prolongs recovery time. We examined whether virtual reality (VR) can substitute for sedation. The primary outcome was the overall satisfaction of patients who underwent colonoscopy with VR headset compared with patients who underwent standard sedation. Pain during the procedure, polyp detection rate (PDR), colonoscopy duration, post-colonoscopy adverse events, post-colonoscopy recovery, time-to-return to daily functions, and turnaround time at the endoscopy unit were secondary outcomes. METHODS: The study was approved by Sheba Medical Center's ethics committee IRB number 21-8177-SMC. Sixty patients were sequentially enrolled in a 1:1 ratio to either standard sedated colonoscopy or VR-unsedated procedure, and all patients signed a written informed consent. 28/30 patients successfully completed the colonoscopy using VR headset. Overall satisfaction score was comparable between the groups. RESULTS: There was no difference between VR and controls in colonoscopy duration, or PDR. VR patients had numerically lower rate of post-colonoscopy adverse events than controls. The proportion of VR patients who reported resuming daily activities on the day of the procedure was significantly higher than in the control group. The VR group patients spent significantly less time in the hospital compared to the control group. CONCLUSIONS: VR technology can provide adequate substitution for sedation for most patients undergoing colonoscopy and offers comparable patient satisfaction and faster return to daily activities.

Optimizing pediatric periprocedural pain management part II-Adjunct therapies to support the use of infiltrative anesthetics.

Pediatric procedure-related pain management is often incompletely understood, inadequately addressed, and critical in influencing a child's lifelong relationship with the larger healthcare community. We present a comprehensive review of infiltrative anesthetics, including a comparison of their mechanisms of action and relative safety and efficacy data to help guide clinical selection. We also describe the multimodal utilization of adjunct therapies-in series and in parallel-to support the optimization of pediatric periprocedural pain management, enhance the patient experience, and provide alternatives to sedation medication and general anesthesia.

Efficacy of intrauterine device procedural analgesics.

ABSTRACT: Nearly half of all pregnancies worldwide are unintended. Intrauterine devices are an effective, long-acting form of pregnancy prevention that require minimal maintenance, and also can be used in patients with menorrhagia. However, they are underused because of pain associated with their insertion. Topical and local anesthesia are good options for reducing procedural pain in select patients. IUD placement falls within the scope of practice for physician associates/assistants (PAs) practicing in family medicine, internal medicine, and women's health. PAs should be aware of these additional analgesia options available to patients in order to increase use of effective contraception.

Cumulative sucrose exposure for repeated procedural pain in preterm neonates and neurodevelopment at 18 months of corrected age: a prospective observational longitudinal study.

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.

No pain relief by virtual reality during hysterosalpingography (HSG): results from a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Is virtual reality (VR) an effective non-pharmacological tool to reduce procedural pain during hysterosalpingography (HSG)? SUMMARY ANSWER: An HSG with VR does not reduce procedural pain scores compared to an HSG without VR. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: An HSG is often experienced as painful and uncomfortable. VR has been proven successful to reduce acute procedural pain during a variety of medical procedures and interventions. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We performed a two-centre open-label randomized controlled trial between January 2021 and October 2022. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Women scheduled for HSG as part of their infertility work-up were screened for participation. After informed consent, women were randomized between HSG with or without VR. Due to the nature of the intervention, the study was not blinded. VR was administered by a head-mounted device displaying nature movies and/or relaxation exercises. The primary endpoint was procedural pain measured using VAS (scale 0.0-10.0 cm). Procedural pain was divided into overall pain score and peak pain score during the procedure. It was measured immediately after HSG. Secondary endpoints included patient satisfaction, VR preferences, and adverse effects of VR. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: We included a total of 134 women, 69 to the intervention group (HSG with VR) and 65 to the control group (HSG without VR). The mean VAS for peak pain was 6.80 cm (SD 2.25) in the intervention group versus 6.60 cm (SD 2.40) in the control group (mean difference 0.28 (95% CI -0.57, 1.12), P = 0.52). The mean VAS for overall pain was 5.00 cm (SD 2.10) in the intervention group versus 4.90 cm (SD 2.13) in the control group (mean difference 0.06 (95% CI -0.71, 0.84), P = 0.88). The expectation that VR would be a good distraction from pain during HSG was correlated with both overall and peak pain scores. When correcting for this expectation, we found that women in the intervention group reported significantly higher scores, both in peak (adjusted MD 0.58 (95% CI -0.81, 1.97), P = 0.021) and overall (adjusted MD 0.43 (95% CI -0.84, 1.71), P = 0.013) pain, compared to the control group. There were no differences in the prevalence of symptoms that were considered as adverse effects of VR. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study was not blinded. Reasons for declining participation in the study were anxiety or wanting full control during HSG, which might have created selection bias. The distraction score possibly indicates that the level of VR immersiveness was not optimal due to the lack of sound and/or the type of VR applications. Future studies should investigate whether more immersive or interactive VR applications could decrease procedural pain scores during HSG. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Since VR does not reduce procedural pain, this additional tool should not be used during HSG. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): There was no external funding for this study. KR and AvH report receiving a travel grant from Merck outside the scope of this study. BM is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) investigator grant (GNT1176437) and BM reports consultancy for Merck, Organon, and Norgine and travel and research funding from Merck. BM holds stock for ObsEva. CL reports receiving research grants from Merck, and Ferring. KD and VM report receiving travel and speaker's fees from Guerbet and research grants from Guerbet. VM also reports research grants from Merck and Ferring. The remaining authors have nothing to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The trial is registered prospectively in the Netherlands Trial Register (trialregister.nl registration number NL9203, currently accessible on trialsearch.who.int). TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 16-01-2021. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: The first participant was enrolled on 19 January 2021.

Investigating visual preferences of clinical mechanical anesthetic vibration: a cross-sectional image survey.

While mechanical vibration lessens discomfort associated with injection site pain (ISP), many local anesthetic injectors (LAIs) do not use vibratory anesthetic devices (VADs). Injector preference of vibration device is influenced by functional concerns, but qualitatively there is an element of adoption that is driven by visual feedback. We sought to capture operator preferences of vibration device design elements to further understand why injectors do not use these devices. We conducted a survey of image preferences among nurses and medical assistants employed at 8 dermatological clinics to investigate barriers to VAD use. Images were electronically modified with features distinct from the original device (a VAD commonly used in clinical practice). Participants rated their likelihood and comfort of use of each VAD represented in the images. Two-sample t-tests were used to compare the rating of the unmodified VAD to each modified VAD within participants. A response rate of 100% was achieved with 35 participants (average age, 38.5 years; 6 (17.1%) male, 29 (82.9%) female). Despite 28 (80%) participants knowing that mechanical vibration reduces ISP, only 16 (45.7%) endorsed ever using mechanical vibration as topical anesthetic. Images modified by pattern, color, and sterility covering were rated significantly lower than the original, unmodified VAD image (plain white VAD), confirming that visual feedback does impact adoption. Through independent comment categorization, aesthetics were found to be important to LAIs. Aesthetic preferences opposing functional concerns may factor into the lack of VAD use. Defining these visual preference barriers to adoption may help promote VAD use during dermatologic procedures.

Dezocine as preemptive analgesia alleviates ultrapulse CO2 fractional laser treatment induced pain in patients with acne scars.

BACKGROUND: Ultrapluse CO2 fractional laser technology has emerged as an effective treatment for scar management. However, one drawback of this modality is the pain caused during the procedure. This study aims to explore the efficacy and safety of dezocine (DZC) as preemptive analgesia for reduction of pain induced by ultrapulse CO2 fractional laser treatment for acne scars. METHODS: The study cohort included 78 outpatients with acne scars between February and April 2023. Patients were randomly assigned into three groups with intravenous injection (iv) of DZC prior to laser treatment: (1) control, iv of saline; (2) DZC group 1 (DZC_1), iv of DZC at 0.15 mg/kg; and (3) DZC_2, iv of DZC at 0.20 mg/kg. After 30 min, one session of ultrapulse CO2 fractional laser treatment on acne scars was performed. Hemodynamics, visual analogue scale (VAS), and anxiety visual analog test (AVAT) were monitored prior to, during, and after the procedure. RESULTS: Operative success rates for patients in the control, DZC_1, and DZC_2 groups were 34.6%, 84.6%, and 100%, respectively. DZC administered with either dosage significantly reduced the VAS and AVAT scores of patients in treatment groups as compared with the subjects in the control group during the course of ultrapulse CO2 fractional laser treatment. Patients in DZC_1 and DZC_2 groups did not show any significant difference in hemodynamic parameters, VAS, and AVAT scores. Temporary adverse effects such as nausea and dizziness were observed in some subjects after treatment; the symptoms were quickly dissolved after a rest in supine position. CONCLUSIONS: DZC as preemptive analgesia could effectively reduce pain and anxiety induced by ultrapulse CO2 fractional laser treatment in patients. This study provided an option of preemptive anesthesia to minimize the pain and discomforts associated with laser treatments in clinical practices.

Nonpharmacological Interventions to Mitigate Procedural Pain in the NICU: An Integrative Review.

BACKGROUND: Small infants experience a myriad of stimuli while in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU), with many being painful or stressful experiences, although medically necessary. PURPOSE: To determine what is known about nonpharmacological developmental care interventions used in the NICU to mitigate procedural pain of infants born under 32 weeks gestation. SEARCH/STRATEGY: Five electronic databases were searched: Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The inclusion criteria were as follows: experimental and nonexperimental studies from all publication years with infants born at less than 32 weeks gestational age; peer-reviewed research articles studying nonpharmacological interventions such as skin-to-skin care, facilitated tucking, nonnutritive sucking, hand hugs, and swaddling; and English language articles. Our search yielded 1435 articles. After the elimination of 736 duplicates, a further 570 were deemed irrelevant based on their abstract/titles. Then, 124 full-text articles were analyzed with our inclusion and exclusion criteria. FINDINGS: Twenty-seven studies were reviewed. Sucrose, facilitated tucking, pacifier, skin-to-skin care, and human milk appeared to lessen pain experienced during heel sticks, suctioning, nasogastric tube insertions, and echocardiograms. All nonpharmacological interventions failed to prove efficacious to adequately manage pain during retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) examinations. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Evidence review demonstrates that healthcare practitioners should use nonpharmacological measures to help prevent pain from day-to-day procedures in the NICU including heel sticks, nasogastric tube insertions, suctioning, echocardiograms, and subcutaneous injections. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Future research is necessary to better understand and measure how pain is manifested by very small premature infants. Specific research on mitigating the pain of examinations for retinopathy of prematurity is also needed.