Describing and predicting the nature of procedural pain after thermal injuries: implications for research

Virtual reality as an adjunctive non-pharmacologic analgesic for acute burn pain during medical procedures

INTRODUCTION

Excessive pain during medical procedures is a widespread problem but is especially problematic during daily wound care of patients with severe burn injuries.

METHODS

Burn patients report 35-50% reductions in procedural pain while in a distracting immersive virtual reality, and fMRI brain scans show associated reductions in pain-related brain activity during VR. VR distraction appears to be most effective for patients with the highest pain intensity levels. VR is thought to reduce pain by directing patients' attention into the virtual world, leaving less attention available to process incoming neural signals from pain receptors.

CONCLUSIONS

We review evidence from clinical and laboratory research studies exploring Virtual Reality analgesia, concentrating primarily on the work ongoing within our group. We briefly describe how VR pain distraction systems have been tailored to the unique needs of burn patients to date, and speculate about how VR systems could be tailored to the needs of other patient populations in the future.

A randomised controlled trial to test the analgesic efficacy of topical morphine on minor superficial and partial thickness burns in accident and emergency departments

OBJECTIVES

To test the analgesic efficacy of topical morphine on superficial burns within the emergency department by comparing pain scores, comfort ratings and analgesia taken by participants.

METHOD

A placebo-controlled three-treatment randomised controlled trial was undertaken. 59 participants were randomly allocated to receive a dressing containing Intrasite gel and morphine sulphate, Intrasite gel and water or the conventional Jelonet dressing. The study design enabled double-blinding between the two Intrasite gel treatments.

RESULTS

49 participants were included in the final analysis as 10 were lost to follow-up. No significant differences were observed between the pain scores or comfort ratings of the three treatments. Participants receiving Jelonet and the placebo reduced their pain scores by the greatest amount overall. However, participants receiving morphine were the only group to reduce pain scores by >20 mm on two consecutive time intervals (2 and 6 h). At 12 h the morphine group reported the highest pain scores. Only 4/15 participants receiving topical morphine administered additional analgesia compared with 12/17 receiving the Jelonet dressing and 6/17 receiving Intrasite and water (p = 0.055). However, when all analgesia was taken into account, the morphine group was administered the greatest amount. Overall, the placebo group reported their dressings to be the most comfortable and took the least amount of analgesia. Minor adverse reactions included itching, burning and a rash. No serious adverse reactions were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical morphine sulphate does not seem to be as effective when used for the pain associated with superficial burns as when used for the pain associated with chronic inflammatory wounds. (The European Clinical Trials Database number for this study is 2005-003285-42.).