Optimizing burn wound procedural pain control, efficiency, and satisfaction through integrated nurse and physician education.

Herein, we report the results of a quality improvement project (QI). Following a review of the burn unit practices, a nursing-led, physician supported educational intervention regarding optimal timing, dosage, and indication for medications used during hydrotherapy, including midazolam and opioids, was implemented. We hypothesized that such intervention would support improvement in both nurse and patient satisfaction with pain control management. Patients undergoing hydrotherapy were surveyed. Demographics, opioid dose prescribed (oral morphine equivalents), midazolam use, timing of administration, and adverse events were collected. Patient pain scores (1-10) before and after hydrotherapy and patient and nurse satisfaction scores (1-10) after hydrotherapy were collected. The pre- and post-education populations were compared. P < 0.05 was considered significant. Post-education, administration of opioids (59.1% v. 0%, p < 0.001) and midazolam (59.1% vs. 10.4%; p < 0.001) prior to hydrotherapy significantly improved, leading to fewer patients requiring rescue opioids during hydrotherapy (25% vs. 74%, p < 0.001). Hydrotherapy duration significantly decreased post-education (19 [13.3-30] min vs. 32 [18-43] min, p = 0.003). Nurses' ratings of their patient's pain control (9 [7.3-10] vs. 7.5 [6-9], p = 0.004) and ease of procedure (10 [9,10] vs. 9 [7.8-10], p = 0.037) significantly improved. Patients' pain management satisfaction rating did not change, but the number of subjects rating their pain management as excellent tended to increase (36.4% vs. 20%, p = 0.077). Nursing led, physician supported, education can improve medication administration prior to and during hydrotherapy, increasing the ease of the procedure as well as staff satisfaction.

Opioids for procedural pain in neonates.

BACKGROUND: Neonates might be exposed to numerous painful procedures due to diagnostic reasons, therapeutic interventions, or surgical procedures. Options for pain management include opioids, non-pharmacological interventions, and other drugs. Morphine, fentanyl, and remifentanil are the opioids most often used in neonates. However, negative impact of opioids on the structure and function of the developing brain has been reported. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of opioids in term or preterm neonates exposed to procedural pain, compared to placebo or no drug, non-pharmacological intervention, other analgesics or sedatives, other opioids, or the same opioid administered by a different route. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was December 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials conducted in preterm and term infants of a postmenstrual age (PMA) up to 46 weeks and 0 days exposed to procedural pain where opioids were compared to 1) placebo or no drug; 2) non-pharmacological intervention; 3) other analgesics or sedatives; 4) other opioids; or 5) the same opioid administered by a different route. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were pain assessed with validated methods and any harms. We used a fixed-effect model with risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, and their confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 independent studies (enrolling 823 newborn infants): seven studies compared opioids to no treatment or placebo (the main comparison in this review), two studies to oral sweet solution or non-pharmacological intervention, and five studies (of which two were part of the same study) to other analgesics and sedatives. All studies were performed in a hospital setting. Opioids compared to placebo or no drug Compared to placebo, opioids probably reduce pain score assessed with the Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP)/PIPP-Revised (PIPP-R) scale during the procedure (MD -2.58, 95% CI -3.12 to -2.03; 199 participants, 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence); may reduce Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS) during the procedure (MD -1.97, 95% CI -2.46 to -1.48; 102 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence); and may result in little to no difference in pain score assessed with the Douleur Aiguë du Nouveau-né (DAN) scale one to two hours after the procedure (MD -0.20, 95% CI -2.21 to 1.81; 42 participants, 1 study; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain score assessed with the PIPP/PIPP-R scale up to 30 minutes after the procedure (MD 0.14, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.45; 123 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) or one to two hours after the procedure (MD -0.83, 95% CI -2.42 to 0.75; 54 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of bradycardia (RR 3.19, 95% CI 0.14 to 72.69; 172 participants, 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence). Opioids may result in an increase in episodes of apnea compared to placebo (RR 3.15, 95% CI 1.08 to 9.16; 199 participants, 3 studies; low-certainty evidence): with one study reporting a concerning increase in severe apnea (RR 7.44, 95% CI 0.42 to 132.95; 31 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of hypotension (RR not estimable, risk difference 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.06; 88 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported parent satisfaction with care provided in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Opioids compared to non-pharmacological intervention The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain score assessed with the Crying Requires oxygen Increased vital signs Expression Sleep (CRIES) scale during the procedure when compared to facilitated tucking (MD -4.62, 95% CI -6.38 to -2.86; 100 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence) or sensorial stimulation (MD 0.32, 95% CI -1.13 to 1.77; 100 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). The other main outcomes were not reported. Opioids compared to other analgesics or sedatives The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain score assessed with the PIPP/PIPP-R during the procedure (MD -0.29, 95% CI -1.58 to 1.01; 124 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence); up to 30 minutes after the procedure (MD -1.10, 95% CI -2.82 to 0.62; 12 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence); and one to two hours after the procedure (MD -0.17, 95% CI -2.22 to 1.88; 12 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported any harms. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of apnea during (RR 3.27, 95% CI 0.85 to 12.58; 124 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) and after the procedure (RR 2.71, 95% CI 0.11 to 64.96; 124 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) and on hypotension (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.32 to 5.59; 204 participants, 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence). The other main outcomes were not reported. We identified no studies comparing different opioids (e.g. morphine versus fentanyl) or different routes for administration of the same opioid (e.g. morphine enterally versus morphine intravenously). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared to placebo, opioids probably reduce pain score assessed with PIPP/PIPP-R scale during the procedure; may reduce NIPS during the procedure; and may result in little to no difference in DAN one to two hours after the procedure. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain assessed with other pain scores or at different time points. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of bradycardia, hypotension or severe apnea. Opioids may result in an increase in episodes of apnea. No studies reported parent satisfaction with care provided in the NICU. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on any outcome when compared to non-pharmacological interventions or to other analgesics. We identified no studies comparing opioids to other opioids or comparing different routes of administration of the same opioid.

Low-dose intranasal dexmedetomidine premedication improves epidural labor analgesia onset and reduces procedural pain on epidural puncture: a prospective randomized double-blind clinical study.

BACKGROUND: Epidural labor analgesia is a safe and effective method of pain management during labor with the drawbacks of delayed onset and maternal distress during epidural puncture. This study aimed to determine whether pretreatment with intranasal low-dose dexmedetomidine effectively shortens the onset of analgesia and reduces procedural pain. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized double-blind trial, nulliparous patients were randomly assigned to either the intranasal dexmedetomidine group or the control group. The intranasal dexmedetomidine group received 0.5 µg/kg dexmedetomidine intranasally, and the control group received an equal volume of normal saline intranasally. Both groups were maintained with a programmed intermittent epidural bolus. The primary outcome was the onset time of analgesia and scores of pain related to the epidural puncture. RESULTS: Seventy-nine patients were enrolled, and 60 completed the study and were included in the analysis. The time to achieve adequate analgesia was significantly shorter in the intranasal dexmedetomidine group than in the control group (hazard ratio = 2.069; 95% CI, 2.187 to 3.606; P = 0.010). The visual analogue scale pain scores during epidural puncture in the intranasal dexmedetomidine group were also significantly lower than those in the control group (2.0 (1.8-2.5) vs. 3.5 (3.3-4.5), P ≤ 0.001, Table 2). Pretreatment with intranasal dexmedetomidine before epidural labor analgesia was associated with improved visual analogue scale pain scores and Ramsay scores, less consumption of analgesics and higher maternal satisfaction (P < 0.05). No differences were observed for labor and neonatal outcomes or the incidence of adverse effects between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment with intranasal dexmedetomidine before epidural labor analgesia yielded a faster onset of analgesia and decreased epidural puncture pain without increasing adverse effects. Pretreatment with intranasal dexmedetomidine may be a useful adjunct for the initiation of epidural analgesia, and further investigation should be encouraged to determine its utility more fully. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was prospectively registered at Chictr.org.cn on 29/05/2020 with the registration number ChiCTR2000033356 ( http://www.chictr.org.cn/listbycreater.aspx ).

Non-opioid analgesics for procedural pain in neonates.

BACKGROUND: Neonates are an extremely vulnerable patient population, with 6% to 9% admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) following birth. Neonates admitted to the NICU will undergo multiple painful procedures per day throughout their stay. There is increasing evidence that frequent and repetitive exposure to painful stimuli is associated with poorer outcomes later in life. To date, a wide variety of pain control mechanisms have been developed and implemented to address procedural pain in neonates. This review focused on non-opioid analgesics, specifically non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists, which alleviate pain through inhibiting cellular pathways to achieve analgesia.  The analgesics considered in this review show potential for pain relief in clinical practice; however, an evidence summation compiling the individual drugs they comprise and outlining the benefits and harms of their administration is lacking. We therefore sought to summarize the evidence on the level of pain experienced by neonates both during and following procedures; relevant drug-related adverse events, namely episodes of apnea, desaturation, bradycardia, and hypotension; and the effects of combinations of drugs.  As the field of neonatal procedural pain management is constantly evolving, this review aimed to ascertain the scope of non-opioid analgesics for neonatal procedural pain to provide an overview of the options available to better inform evidence-based clinical practice.  OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of non-opioid analgesics in neonates (term or preterm) exposed to procedural pain compared to placebo or no drug, non-pharmacological intervention, other analgesics, or different routes of administration. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, and two trial registries in June 2022. We screened the reference lists of included studies for studies not identified by the database searches. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster-RCTs in neonates (term or preterm) undergoing painful procedures comparing NSAIDs and NMDA receptor antagonists to placebo or no drug, non-pharmacological intervention, other analgesics, or different routes of administration.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our main outcomes were pain assessed during the procedure and up to 10 minutes after the procedure with a validated scale; episodes of bradycardia; episodes of apnea; and hypotension requiring medical therapy. MAIN RESULTS: We included two RCTs involving a total of 269 neonates conducted in Nigeria and India.  NMDA receptor antagonists versus no treatment, placebo, oral sweet solution, or non-pharmacological intervention One RCT evaluated using oral ketamine (10 mg/kg body weight) versus sugar syrup (66.7% w/w at 1 mL/kg body weight) for neonatal circumcision.  The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ketamine on pain score during the procedure, assessed with the Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS), compared with placebo (mean difference (MD) -0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.32 to -0.58; 1 RCT; 145 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No other outcomes of interest were reported on. Head-to-head comparison of different analgesics One RCT evaluated using intravenous fentanyl versus intravenous ketamine during laser photocoagulation for retinopathy of prematurity. Neonates receiving ketamine followed an initial regimen (0.5 mg/kg bolus 1 minute before procedure) or a revised regimen (additional intermittent bolus doses of 0.5 mg/kg every 10 minutes up to a maximum of 2 mg/kg), while those receiving fentanyl followed either an initial regimen (2 µg/kg over 5 minutes, 15 minutes before the procedure, followed by 1 µg/kg/hour as a continuous infusion) or a revised regimen (titration of 0.5 µg/kg/hour every 15 minutes to a maximum of 3 µg/kg/hour). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ketamine compared with fentanyl on pain score assessed with the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R) scores during the procedure (MD 0.98, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.20; 1 RCT; 124 participants; very low-certainty evidence); on episodes of apnea occurring during the procedure (risk ratio (RR) 0.31, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.18; risk difference (RD) -0.09, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.00; 1 study; 124 infants; very low-certainty evidence); and on hypotension requiring medical therapy occurring during the procedure (RR 5.53, 95% CI 0.27 to 112.30; RD 0.03, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.10; 1 study; 124 infants; very low-certainty evidence). The included study did not report pain score assessed up to 10 minutes after the procedure or episodes of bradycardia occurring during the procedure. We did not identify any studies comparing NSAIDs versus no treatment, placebo, oral sweet solution, or non-pharmacological intervention or different routes of administration of the same analgesics. We identified three studies awaiting classification.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The two small included studies comparing ketamine versus either placebo or fentanyl, with very low-certainty evidence, rendered us unable to draw meaningful conclusions. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ketamine on pain score during the procedure compared with placebo or fentanyl. We found no evidence on NSAIDs or studies comparing different routes of administration. Future research should prioritize large studies evaluating non-opioid analgesics in this population. As the studies included in this review suggest potential positive effects of ketamine administration, studies evaluating ketamine are of interest. Furthermore, as we identified no studies on NSAIDs, which are widely used in older infants, or comparing different routes of administration, such studies should be a priority going forward.

Opioids for procedural pain in neonates.

BACKGROUND: Neonates might be exposed to numerous painful procedures due to diagnostic reasons, therapeutic interventions, or surgical procedures. Options for pain management include opioids, non-pharmacological interventions, and other drugs. Morphine, fentanyl, and remifentanil are the opioids most often used in neonates. However, negative impact of opioids on the structure and function of the developing brain has been reported. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of opioids in term or preterm neonates exposed to procedural pain, compared to placebo or no drug, non-pharmacological intervention, other analgesics or sedatives, other opioids, or the same opioid administered by a different route. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was December 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials conducted in preterm and term infants of a postmenstrual age (PMA) up to 46 weeks and 0 days exposed to procedural pain where opioids were compared to 1) placebo or no drug; 2) non-pharmacological intervention; 3) other analgesics or sedatives; 4) other opioids; or 5) the same opioid administered by a different route. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were pain assessed with validated methods and any harms. We used a fixed-effect model with risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, and their confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 independent studies (enrolling 823 newborn infants): seven studies compared opioids to no treatment or placebo (the main comparison in this review), two studies to oral sweet solution or non-pharmacological intervention, and five studies (of which two were part of the same study) to other analgesics and sedatives. All studies were performed in a hospital setting. Opioids compared to placebo or no drug Compared to placebo, opioids probably reduce pain score assessed with the Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP)/PIPP-Revised (PIPP-R) scale during the procedure (MD -2.58, 95% CI -3.12 to -2.03; 199 participants, 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence); may reduce Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS) during the procedure (MD -1.97, 95% CI -2.46 to -1.48; 102 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence); and may result in little to no difference in pain score assessed with the Douleur Aiguë du Nouveau-né (DAN) scale one to two hours after the procedure (MD -0.20, 95% CI -2.21 to 1.81; 42 participants, 1 study; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain score assessed with the PIPP/PIPP-R scale up to 30 minutes after the procedure (MD 0.14, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.45; 123 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) or one to two hours after the procedure (MD -0.83, 95% CI -2.42 to 0.75; 54 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported any harms. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of bradycardia (RR 3.19, 95% CI 0.14 to 72.69; 172 participants, 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence). Opioids may result in an increase in episodes of apnea compared to placebo (RR 3.15, 95% CI 1.08 to 9.16; 199 participants, 3 studies; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of hypotension (RR not estimable, risk difference 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.06; 88 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported parent satisfaction with care provided in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Opioids compared to non-pharmacological intervention The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain score assessed with the Crying Requires oxygen Increased vital signs Expression Sleep (CRIES) scale during the procedure when compared to facilitated tucking (MD -4.62, 95% CI -6.38 to -2.86; 100 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence) or sensorial stimulation (MD 0.32, 95% CI -1.13 to 1.77; 100 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). The other main outcomes were not reported. Opioids compared to other analgesics or sedatives The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain score assessed with the PIPP/PIPP-R during the procedure (MD -0.29, 95% CI -1.58 to 1.01; 124 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence); up to 30 minutes after the procedure (MD -1.10, 95% CI -2.82 to 0.62; 12 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence); and one to two hours after the procedure (MD -0.17, 95% CI -2.22 to 1.88; 12 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported any harms. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of apnea during (RR 3.27, 95% CI 0.85 to 12.58; 124 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) and after the procedure (RR 2.71, 95% CI 0.11 to 64.96; 124 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) and on hypotension (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.32 to 5.59; 204 participants, 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence). The other main outcomes were not reported. We identified no studies comparing different opioids (e.g. morphine versus fentanyl) or different routes for administration of the same opioid (e.g. morphine enterally versus morphine intravenously). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared to placebo, opioids probably reduce pain score assessed with PIPP/PIPP-R scale during the procedure; may reduce NIPS during the procedure; and may result in little to no difference in DAN one to two hours after the procedure. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on pain assessed with other pain scores or at different time points. No studies reported if any harms occurred. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on episodes of bradycardia or hypotension. Opioids may result in an increase in episodes of apnea. No studies reported parent satisfaction with care provided in the NICU. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of opioids on any outcome when compared to non-pharmacological interventions or to other analgesics. We identified no studies comparing opioids to other opioids or comparing different routes of administration of the same opioid.

The role of time interval elimination on pain control of preterm infants by sucrose administration.

PURPOSE: The 2-min time interval of sucrose administration given before minor painful procedures in preterm infants is based on a few limited studies. We aimed to assess availability of sucrose analgesia in emergency states of minor procedural pain by eliminating the 2-min time interval prior to heel lance in preterm infants. The primary outcome was Premature Infants Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R) at 30 and 60 s. METHODS: Healthy 69 preterms undergoing a heel lance, who were assigned randomly to 1 of 2 groups, i.e., group I, with the 2-min time interval of per oral 24% sucrose given prior to heel lance, or group II, without a time interval of per oral 24% sucrose, were recruited. Premature Infants Pain Profile-Revised, crying incidence, duration, and heart rate at 30 and 60 s following heel lance were the outcome measures in this single-center, randomized, prospective study. RESULTS: The 2 groups did not differ significantly in PIPP-R scores at 30 s (6.63 vs. 6.32, p = .578) and 60 s (5.80 vs. 5.38, p = .478). The crying incidence was similar between the 2 groups (p = .276). The median crying duration was 6 s (range: 1-13 s) in group I and 4.5 s (range: 1-18 s) in group II (p = .226). No significant differences in the heart rates between the 2 groups and the proportion of adverse events by time interval elimination were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Eliminating the time interval did not decrease the analgesic effect of orally administered 24% sucrose given prior to heel lance. In emergency states of minor procedural pain, eliminating the 2-min time interval following sucrose administration is safe and efficacious in preterm infants.

Morphine prophylaxis alleviates pain in transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt procedure: A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is an accepted minimal invasive procedure for the management of complications of portal hypertension. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the value of the preemptive administration of morphine, when compared with on-demand morphine, during TIPS. METHODS: The present study was a randomized control trial. A total of 49 patients were selected to receive 10 mg of morphine either before the TIPS procedure (group B, n= 26), or on demand when needed during the TIPS procedure (group A, n= 23). The patient's pain was scored using the visual analog scale (VAS) during the procedure. VAS, pain performance, HR, systolic pressure, diastolic pressure and SPO2 were recorded at four-time points: before the operation (T0), during the trans-hepatic puncture of the portal vein (T1), during the intrahepatic channel expansion (T2), and when the operation was finished (T3). The duration of the operation was also recorded. RESULTS: In group A, the proportion of severe pain at T1 was 4.3% (one case), two cases were combined with vagus reflex, and the proportion of severe pain at T2 was 65.2% (15 cases). No severe pain occurred in group B. The VAS score significantly decreased at T1, T2 and T3 in group B, when compared to group A (P< 0.05). HR, systolic pressure and diastolic pressure significantly decreased at T2 and T3 in group B, when compared to group A (P< 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of SPO2 (P> 0.05). CONCLUSION: Preemptive analgesia can effectively relieve severe pain during TIPS, improve patient comfort and compliance, ensure a routine procedure, and offer excellent safety, and is simple and effective.

Procedural pain in patients with cancer: a Delphi expert management consensus.

OBJECTIVES: Diagnosis, treatment and care of cancer often involve procedures that may be distressing and potentially painful for patients. The PROCEDIO Study aimed to generate expert-based recommendations on the management of moderate to severe procedural pain in inpatients and outpatients with cancer. METHODS: Using a two-round Delphi method, experts from pain and palliative care units, medical and radiation oncology and haematology departments expressed their agreement on 24 statements using a 9-point Likert scale, which were classified as appropriate (median 7-9), uncertain (4-6) or inappropriate (1-3). Consensus was achieved if at least two-thirds of the panel scored within the range containing the median. RESULTS: With an overall agreement on the current definition of procedural pain, participants suggested a wider description based on evidence and their clinical experience. A strong consensus was achieved regarding the need for a comprehensive pre-procedural pain assessment and experts emphasised that healthcare professionals involved in procedural pain management should be adequately trained. Most panellists (98.2%) agreed that pharmacological treatment should be chosen considering the duration of the procedure. Transmucosal fentanyl (96.5%) and morphine (71.7%) were recommended as the most appropriate drugs. Oral and nasal transmucosal fentanyl were agreed as the most suitable for both outpatients and inpatients, while consensus was reached for intravenous and subcutaneous morphine for inpatients. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide updated expert-based recommendations on the definition, prevention and treatment of moderate to severe procedural pain, which could inform specialists involved in pain management of patients with cancer.

Como avaliar a dor sentida por crianças pré-escolares durante os procedimentos odontológicos? revisão de escopo / How to evaluate the pain felt by preschool children during dental procedures? scope review

Introdução: o diagnóstico da dor sentida pela criança é um passo importante para orientar o cirurgião-dentista sobre o uso de técnicas farmacológicas e não farmacológicas que minimizem a sensação desagradável. Objetivo: identificar os instrumentos usados para a avaliação da dor de crianças pré-escolares durante procedimentos odontológicos. Fontes dos dados: busca por artigos foi realizada no PubMed, Scopus, The Cochrane Library e Google Schoolar, em abril/2022. Estudos observacionais e de intervenção que avaliaram a dor de crianças pré- escolares em atendimento odontológico, publicados em português, inglês ou espanhol foram incluídos. Estudos que avaliaram a dor de crianças tratadas sob sedação ou anestesia geral, bem como a dor pós-operatória, foram excluídos. Síntese dos dados: um total de 767 artigos foram identificados; 133 artigos foram lidos integralmente e 62 incluídos. Em 48 estudos, a dor foi avaliada por meio de autorrelato, usando instrumentos como a Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale e outras escalas de faces como a Faces Pain Scale-Revised e a Faces Pain Scale. Quando a dor foi avaliada a partir do comportamento infantil, foram usadas escalas como a Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability Scale (FLACC) e a Sound, Eye and Motor scale (SEM). Conclusão: a dor processual das crianças foi avaliada por meio de autorrelato e da observação do seu comportamento. Tanto as escalas de autorrelato quanto as observacionais têm limitações. A combinação dos instrumentos pode ser uma estratégia na avaliação da dor de pré-escolares.

Introduction: the diagnosis of the pain felt by the child is an important step to guide the dentist on the use of pharmacological and non-pharmacological techniques that minimize unpleasant sensation. Objective: to identify the instruments used to assess the pain of preschool children during dental procedures. Sources of Data: search for articles was conducted at PubMed, Scopus, The Cochrane Library and Google Schoolar in April/2022. Observational and interventional studies that evaluated the pain of preschool children in dental care, published in Portuguese, English or Spanish were included. Studies evaluating the pain of children treated under sedation or general anesthesia, as well as postoperative pain, were excluded. Synthesis of data: a total of 767 articles were identified; 133 articles were read in full and 62 included. In 48 studies, pain was evaluated by self-report, using instruments such as the Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale and other face scales such as the Faces Pain Scale-Revised and the Faces Pain Scale. When pain was evaluated from child behavior, scales such as Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability Scale (FLACC) and Sound, Eye and Motor scale (SEM) were used. Conclusion: the procedural pain of the children was evaluated by self-report and the observation of their behavior. Both self-report and observational scales have limitations. The combination of the instruments can be a strategy in the evaluation of the pain of preschoolers.

Analysis on the effect of intravenous anesthesia with dexmedetomidine and propofol combined with seaweed polysaccharides on hemodynamics and analgesia in pregnant females undergoing painless induced abortion.

This study attempted to investigate the effect of intravenous anesthesia with dexmedetomidine and propofol combined with seaweed polysaccharides on painless induced abortion. A total of 82 pregnant females were divided into study group and reference group. The subjects in the study group took seaweed polysaccharides orally before surgery and received intravenous anesthesia with dexmedetomidine and propofol, while the subjects in the reference group received intravenous anesthesia with sufentanil combined with propofol. The onset time of anesthesia in the reference group was significantly shorter than that in the study group (P<0.001) and both recovery time and the dosage of propofol in the study group were significantly lower than those in the reference group (P<0.001). The values of MAP and HR at T3 and T4, clinical analgesia effective rate, ramsay sedation scores and incidence of adverse reactions of the subjects in study group was significantly better than those indexes of the subjects in reference group (P<0.05). The intravenous anesthesia with dexmedetomidine and propofol combined with seaweed polysaccharides is a promising strategy for painless induced abortion, which is worthy of application and popularization in clinical practice.

Use of low dose vaginal misoprostol in office hysteroscopy: a pre-post interventional study.

A pre-post interventional study of patients undergoing office hysteroscopy alone and in combination with endometrial biopsy was performed during October 2015-March 2018 to evaluate the effect of low dose vaginal misoprostol on patient's pain. Pain scores were assessed using the visual analog scale at the completion of the procedure. There were 646 patients included in the study. Of these, 462 had office hysteroscopy alone; 206 (44.6%) received 50 mcg of vaginal misoprostol the night prior to the procedure and the remaining 256 (55.4%) patients had no cervical ripening. The reported pain score following hysteroscopy was significantly lower among patients who received misoprostol [4(0-10) vs. 5(0-10); p=.001]. Most patients (78.2%) did not report any misoprostol related side effects. Of the 184 patients who underwent a combination of office hysteroscopy and endometrial biopsy, 97 (52.7%) received pre-procedure vaginal misoprostol while 87 (47.3%) did not. Post procedure pain was independent of pre-treatment with vaginal misoprostol (6.3 ± 2.7 vs. 6.6 ± 2.7; p = .54).Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Office hysteroscopy and endometrial biopsy is increasingly performed for evaluation of various gynaecologic conditions, however, patients' perceived pain at the time of procedure may lead to incomplete procedures. Various doses of misoprostol have been tested to reduce patients' pain, however none lower than 200 mcg vaginally, and at these doses, side effects are reported.What the results of this study add? To date, there is a scarcity of published data on the use of low dose misoprostol (50 mcg) in gynaecologic procedures. Our study found that the use of low dose vaginal misoprostol prior to office hysteroscopy is associated with lower reported pain and tenaculum utilisation during the procedure. However, vaginal misoprostol prior to successive office hysteroscopy and endometrial biopsy failed to decrease the reported pain, and the overall pain score was higher than hysteroscopy alone.What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? The use of low dose vaginal misoprostol (50 mcg) the evening prior to office hysteroscopy is associated with lower reported pain and tenaculum utilisation and is not associated with significant side effects. Therefore, 50 mcg of misoprostol could be used in clinical practice as a method to reduce patients' reported pain during office hysteroscopy.

Does The Use of Ethyl Chloride Improve Patient-Reported Pain Scores With Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Dressing Changes? A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is commonly used for surgical incisions and large wounds, particularly in the context of trauma. Research has shown that patients report that the most painful aspect of NPWT is related to foam dressing changes. This study aimed to determine whether topical use of the vapocoolant anesthetic ethyl chloride would impact patient-reported pain during these procedures. METHODS: This study was a single-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trial in patients who were undergoing NPWT foam dressing change following surgery performed by the orthopedic trauma team. A total of 100 patients were randomized to receive ethyl chloride topical anesthetic spray or placebo (tissue culture grade water) during dressing change. The outcome measure specified prior to enrollment was a mean decrease in patient-reported pain of 1.7 points using a numeric rating scale. Baseline and procedural characteristics were collected to investigate contributions to patient-reported pain. We hypothesized that the use of ethyl chloride would decrease patient reported pain scores. RESULTS: Significantly more females were randomized to the receive vapocoolant; remaining baseline and procedural characteristics were similar between groups. The median time for NPWT drape removal was 2.0 minutes in both groups (p = 0.66). The postprocedural pain reported by patients was significantly lower in the experimental group compared with placebo (median, 5.0 vs. 7.0; p = 0.03). Multivariate analysis adjusting for potential confounders showed treatment group to be the strongest predictor of postprocedure pain (p = 0.002). Additionally, a generalized linear model suggests that treatment group was the strongest predictor of change in pain score as reported by patients prior to and immediately following dressing change. CONCLUSIONS: Use of vapocoolant spray during NPWT dressing change for orthopedic trauma wounds and surgical incisions was feasible and resulted in significant reduction in patient-reported pain associated with the procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, Level I.

The Physiological Effects, Including Risks and Potential Benefits, of Cannabis for Patients Undergoing Elective Orthopedic Procedures.

Given the evolving regulations regarding and availability of cannabis in the United States, physicians should understand the risks and benefits associated with its use. Patients are interested in learning about the use of cannabis for the management of orthopedic pain and any potential risks associated with it when undergoing elective surgery. Edible and topical cannabis products appear to have fewer side effects than inhaled cannabis products. A review of the literature was performed regarding different modes of administration and their related risks and potential benefits specifically regarding perioperative concerns for elective orthopedic procedures. Larger studies are necessary to further determine the efficacy, safety, and side effect profile of cannabis. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(3):e314-e319.].

Methadone effectively attenuates acute and long-term consequences of neonatal repetitive procedural pain in a rat model.

BACKGROUND: Painful procedures in early life cause acute pain and can alter pain processing at a spinal level lasting into adulthood. Current methods of analgesia seem unable to prevent both acute and long-term hypersensitivity associated with neonatal pain. The current study aims to prevent acute and long-term hypersensitivity associated with neonatal procedural pain using methadone analgesia in rat pups. METHODS: Sprague-Dawley rat pups received either methadone (1 mg/kg) or saline prior to repetitive needle pricks into the left hind paw from the day of birth (postnatal day (P)0) to P7. Control littermates received a tactile stimulus. Mechanical sensitivity was assessed during the neonatal period (P0-P7), from weaning to adulthood (3-7 weeks) and following surgical re-injury of the same dermatome in adulthood. RESULTS: Methadone administration completely reversed acute hypersensitivity from P0 to P7. In addition, neonatal methadone analgesia prevented prolonged hypersensitivity after re-injury in adulthood, without affecting sensitivity from weaning to adulthood. CONCLUSIONS: The current study shows that neonatal methadone analgesia can attenuate acute as well as long-term hypersensitivity associated with neonatal procedural pain in a rat model. IMPACT: Methadone treatment attenuates acute and long-term hypersensitivity associated with neonatal pain in a rat model. Clinical effectiveness studies are urgently warranted to assess acute and long-term analgesic effectivity of methadone.

Propofol for painful procedures in palliative care.

Refractory pain during care procedures causes a real challenge for terminally ill patients. We are hereby publishing three cases of patients who received repeated procedural sedations using propofol during the painful care procedures. All patients experience pain relief with no side effects although care procedures initially were a traumatic experience to them despite the usual medication. This therapeutic solution, which would need to be assessed on a case-by-case basis by evaluating the benefit-risk balance, could become a suitable comfort treatment used by palliative care teams.

Paracervical blocks facilitate timely brachytherapy amidst COVID-19.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic presents serious challenges for brachytherapists, and in the time-sensitive case of locally advanced cervical cancer, the need for curative brachytherapy (BT) is critical for survival. Given the high-volume of locally advanced cervical cancer in our safety-net hospital, we developed a strategy in close collaboration with our gynecology oncology and anesthesia colleagues to allow for completely clinic-based intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: This technical report will highlight our experience with the use of paracervical blocks (PCBs) and oral multimodal analgesia (MMA) for appropriately selected cervical ICBT cases, allowing for completely clinic-based treatment. RESULTS: 18 of 19 (95%) screened patients were eligible for in-clinic ICBT. The excluded patient had significant vaginal fibrosis. 38 of 39 intracavitary implants were successfully transitioned for entirely in-clinic treatment utilizing PCBs and oral MMA (97% success rate). One case was aborted due to inadequate analgesia secondary to a significantly delayed case start time (PO medication effect diminished). 95% of patients reported no pain at the conclusion of the procedure. The median (IQR) D2cc for rectum and bladder were 64.8 (58.6-70.2) Gy and 84.1 (70.9-89.4) Gy, respectively. Median (IQR) CTV high-risk D90 was 88.0 (85.6-89.8) Gy. CONCLUSIONS: In a multidisciplinary effort, we have successfully transitioned many ICBT cases to the clinic with the use of PCB local anesthesia and oral multimodality therapy in direct response to the current pandemic, thereby mitigating exposure risk to patients and staff as well as reducing overall health care burden.

Feasibility of a transmucosal sublingual fentanyl tablet as a procedural pain treatment in colonoscopy patients: a prospective placebo-controlled randomized study.

Since patients often experience pain and unpleasantness during a colonoscopy, the present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sublingually administered fentanyl tablets for pain treatment. Furthermore, since the use of intravenous drugs significantly increases colonoscopy costs, sublingual tablets could be a cost-effective alternative to intravenous sedation. We conducted a prospective placebo-controlled randomized study of 158 patients to evaluate the analgesic effect of a 100 µg dose of sublingual fentanyl administered before a colonoscopy. Pain, sedation, nausea, and satisfaction were assessed during the colonoscopy by the patients as well as the endoscopists and nurses. Respiratory rate and peripheral arteriolar oxygen saturation were monitored throughout the procedure. There were no differences between the fentanyl and placebo groups in any of the measured variables. The median pain intensity values, as measured using a numerical rating scale, were 4.5 in the fentanyl group and 5 in the placebo group. The sedation and oxygen saturation levels and the respiratory rate did not differ between the groups. The majority of the colonoscopies were completed.Our results indicate that a 100 µg dose of sublingual fentanyl is not beneficial compared to the placebo in the treatment of procedural pain during a colonoscopy.

Pain management in patients with end-stage renal disease and calciphylaxis- a survey of clinical practices among physicians.

BACKGROUND: Calciphylaxis is a rare condition usually seen in patients with end-stage renal disease. Pain is a hallmark of this condition and can be extremely difficult to control. Anecdotal data suggests that pain management in calciphylaxis is challenging with variable approaches across the United Kingdom (UK) and internationally. A knowledge and practice survey was conducted to establish current practice in the management of pain in patients with calciphylaxis, in the UK. Based on the results and clinical experience the authors suggest a clinical practice guideline. METHODS: An online questionnaire was circulated among physicians (renal and palliative care) involved in the management of pain in calciphylaxis. The questionnaire included a mix of open-ended questions and questions with drop down options. RESULTS: One hundred and six clinicians responded to the survey of which 60 (57%) respondents were from palliative medicine; the remaining 46 (43%) were from renal medicine. 31 (30%) respondents across both specialties had not encountered any patients with a diagnosis of calciphylaxis (renal-2, palliative care-29). A referral to the palliative care team was undertaken by 18% of renal physicians, 32% referred to the pain team and 50% referred to both. Only 3% of the palliative medicine respondents indicated that they had received a referral from the renal team at the time of diagnosis. Opioids were the preferred initial drug of choice for the management of all types of pain. Paracetamol was universally selected as the preferred first-choice adjuvant agent for management of all types of pain. The importance of advance care planning was highlighted with 72% undertaking advanced care planning discussions often or most of the time. CONCLUSION: There was wide variation in the current practice of pain management in patients with calciphylaxis, with variation between renal specialists and palliative care specialists. Referral to specialists in pain management is not universal despite the severe nature of the pain experienced by patients with calciphylaxis. The data generated has facilitated the development of a clinical practice guideline to support complex pain management in a group of patients with multiple comorbidities.

Actinic keratosis area and severity index is not correlated with photodynamic therapy procedural pain.

BACKGROUND: The Actinic Keratosis Area and Severity Index (AKASI) is a validated quantitative tool used to measure the severity of actinic keratoses. Given the success of AKASI in measuring outcomes and therapies related to actinic damage, we hypothesized that AKASI would be correlated to photodynamic therapy (PDT)-related pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate AKASI's correlation with PDT-associated pain for patients with AKs being treated with 5-Aminolevulinic acid (ALA) PDT. METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients being treated for AKs with ALA PDT on the face and/or scalp were recruited from a single center. The AKASI of the treated areas were collected. The patient underwent a standard treatment with ALA-PDT for a total of 10 J/cm2 to treated area. Immediate post-procedural pain scores were measured using a visual-analog pain scale. Pain and AKASI scores were analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficient. RESULTS: AKASI was not correlated to pain score (Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.027, p = 0.87). In sub-group analyses, there was no strong correlation between the scalp AKASI or face AKASI and respective pain scores (p = 0.59 and p = 0.38, respectively). Furthermore, there was no strong correlation between the individual components of AKASI and pain score: distribution (p = 0.26), erythema (p = 0.66) and thickness (p = 0.43). CONCLUSION: There is no correlation between the AKASI score and perceived pain from PDT. Therefore, the need for pain relief using a fan and evaporative cooling should be anticipated for all patients. We feel that this negative result is noteworthy as it supports mechanisms outside of AK destruction as the cause of immediate PDT-related pain.