Efficacy and safety of combined oral sucrose and nonnutritive sucking in pain management for infants: A systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

Effect of pacifier and pacifier with dextrose in reducing pain during orogastric tube insertion in newborns: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the efficacy of pacifier use, with and without 25% dextrose, in reducing pain during orogastric tube insertion in newborns.

STUDY DESIGN

In a randomized controlled trial involving 60 newborns at a public hospital from April to December 2019, participants were divided into three groups: pacifier (n = 20), pacifier with 25% dextrose (n = 20), and control (n = 20). A pacifier, with and without dextrose, was used for the experimental groups, while the control group performed a routine procedure. Neonatal infant pain scale, crying duration, heart rate (HR), and oxygen saturation (SpO2) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Results indicated that the control group experienced significantly higher pain levels, elevated HRs, decreased SpO2, and prolonged crying. Conversely, the pacifier with 25% dextrose group showed a notable reduction in crying duration.

CONCLUSION

A pacifier, with and without 25% dextrose, effectively reduces pain and improves physiological and behavioral parameters during orogastric tube insertion.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

NCT05462964 CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this randomized controlled experimental trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. The clinical trial registration number is https://clinicaltrials.gov ; NCT05462964.

A longitudinal observational study on the epidemiology of painful procedures and sucrose administration in hospitalized preterm neonates

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.

Effect of non-pharmacological interventions on pain in preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of different non-pharmacological interventions for pain management in preterm infants and provide high-quality clinical evidence.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of various non-pharmacological interventions for pain management in preterm infants were searched from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from 2000 to the present (updated March 2023). The primary outcome was pain score reported as standardized mean difference (SMD). The secondary outcomes were oxygen saturation and heart rate reported as the same form.

RESULTS

Thirty five RCTs of 2134 preterm infants were included in the meta-analysis, involving 6 interventions: olfactory stimulation, combined oral sucrose and non-nutritive sucking (OS + NNS), facilitated tucking, auditory intervention, tactile relief, and mixed intervention. Based on moderate-quality evidence, OS + NNS (OR: 3.92, 95% CI: 1.72, 6.15, SUCRA score: 0.73), facilitated tucking (OR: 2.51, 95% CI: 1.15, 3.90, SUCRA score: 0.29), auditory intervention (OR: 2.48, 95% CI: 0.91, 4.10, SUCRA score: 0.27), olfactory stimulation (OR: 1.80, 95% CI: 0.51, 3.14, SUCRA score: 0.25), and mixed intervention (OR: 2.26, 95% CI: 0.10, 4.38, SUCRA score: 0.14) were all superior to the control group for pain relief. For oxygen saturation, facilitated tucking (OR: 1.94, 95% CI: 0.66, 3.35, SUCRA score: 0.64) and auditory intervention (OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.22, 2.04, SUCRA score: 0.36) were superior to the control. For heart rate, none of the comparisons between the various interventions were statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that there are notable variations in the effectiveness of different non-pharmacological interventions in terms of pain scores and oxygen saturation. However, there was no evidence of any improvement in heart rate.

Sucrose analgesia for heel-lance procedures in neonates

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.

Effect of Acupoint Stimulation on Controlling Pain from Heel Lance in Neonates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

To evaluate the effect of acupoint stimulation compared to other interventions on pain control in neonates who underwent heel lance, we searched for randomized controlled trials across six databases (CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline, PubMed, and Web of Science) published up to January 2023. Studies comparing acupoint stimulation and other interventions for controlling heel lance pain in neonates were included. These reports measured at least one of the following variables: pain score, crying time, oxygenation saturation, heart rate, respiration rate, and duration of the procedure. The data were independently extracted by two authors, and the PRISMA guidelines for study selection were followed. A total of 79 articles were screened, and 10 studies, with results on 813 neonates, were included in the final selection. The pain scores recorded during the heel lance procedure were not significantly different between the acupoint stimulation cohort and the control cohort (SMD of -0.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) from -0.52 to 0.01; p = 0.06; I² = 68%). After processing the subgroup analyses, significant differences were found in the comparisons of acupuncture vs. usual care (SMD of -1.25, 95% CI from -2.23 to 0.27) and acupressure vs. usual care (SMD of -0.62, 95% CI from -0.96 to -0.28); nonsignificant differences were found in other comparisons. Our results demonstrate that acupoint stimulation may improve pain score during the heel lance procedure.

Effectiveness of Non-Pharmacological Methods, Such as Breastfeeding, to Mitigate Pain in NICU Infants

Neonates do experience pain and its management is necessary in order to prevent long-term, as well as, short-term effects. The most common source of pain in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) is caused by medically invasive procedures. NICU patients have to endure trauma, medical adhesive related skin injuries, heel lance, venipuncture and intramuscular injection as well as nasogastric catheterization besides surgery. A cornerstone in pain assessment is the use of scales such as COMFORT, PIPP-R, NIPS and N-PASS. This narrative review provides an up to date account of neonate pain management used in NICUs worldwide focusing on non-pharmacological methods. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have well established adverse side effects and opioids are addictive thus pharmacological methods should be avoided if possible at least for mild pain management. Non-pharmacological interventions, particularly breastfeeding and non-nutritive sucking as primary strategies for pain management in neonates are useful strategies to consider. The best non-pharmacological methods are breastfeeding followed by non-nutritive sucking coupled with sucrose sucking. Regrettably most parents used only physical methods and should be trained and involved for best results. Further research in NICU is essential as the developmental knowledge changes and neonate physiology is further uncovered together with its connection to pain.