Pain and distress outcomes in infants and children: a systematic review.

The aim of the present study was to systematically review the recent literature about pain and distress outcomes in children and critically analyze the methodological quality of the reports. The systematic review was based on the PRISMA statement and performed by selecting articles that are indexed in scientific databases. The methodological quality of reports was examined using STROBE statement, for observational studies, and CONSORT statement, for randomized controlled trials. The PedIMMPACT consensus was used to evaluate the psychometric quality of pain instruments. We analyzed 23 empirical studies, including 14 randomized controlled trials, seven cross-sectional studies, and two studies with cohort designs. Fourteen studies included preschool- and schoolchildren, and nine studies included infants. Regarding studies with infants, pain responses were evaluated by heart rate, crying and behavioral observation scales, and distress was evaluated only by salivary cortisol. Four-handed care and sensorial saturation interventions were used to evaluate efficacy to reduce pain and distress responses. Concerning studies with children, both pain and distress responses were evaluated by self- and hetero-reports, behavioral observation and/or physiological measures. Distraction was effective for reducing pain and distress during burn dressing changes and needle procedures, and healing touch intervention reduced distress and pain in chronic patients. All of the studies scored at least 60% in the methodological quality assessment. The pain outcomes included measures of validity that were classified as well-established by the PedIMMPACT. This systematic review gathers scientific evidence of distress-associated pain in children. Pain and distress were measured as distinct constructs, and their associations were poorly analyzed.

Audiovisual distraction for pain relief in paediatric inpatients: A crossover study.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a stressful experience that can have a negative impact on child development. The aim of this crossover study was to examine the efficacy of audiovisual distraction for acute pain relief in paediatric inpatients. METHOD: The sample comprised 40 inpatients (6-11 years) who underwent painful puncture procedures. The participants were randomized into two groups, and all children received the intervention and served as their own controls. Stress and pain-catastrophizing assessments were initially performed using the Child Stress Scale and Pain Catastrophizing Scale for Children, with the aim of controlling these variables. The pain assessment was performed using a Visual Analog Scale and the Faces Pain Scale-Revised after the painful procedures. Group 1 received audiovisual distraction before and during the puncture procedure, which was performed again without intervention on another day. The procedure was reversed in Group 2. Audiovisual distraction used animated short films. A 2 × 2 × 2 analysis of variance for 2 × 2 crossover study was performed, with a 5% level of statistical significance. RESULTS: The two groups had similar baseline measures of stress and pain catastrophizing. A significant difference was found between periods with and without distraction in both groups, in which scores on both pain scales were lower during distraction compared with no intervention. The sequence of exposure to the distraction intervention in both groups and first versus second painful procedure during which the distraction was performed also significantly influenced the efficacy of the distraction intervention. CONCLUSION: Audiovisual distraction effectively reduced the intensity of pain perception in paediatric inpatients. SIGNIFICANCE: The crossover study design provides a better understanding of the power effects of distraction for acute pain management. Audiovisual distraction was a powerful and effective non-pharmacological intervention for pain relief in paediatric inpatients. The effects were detected in subsequent acute painful procedures.

Pain and distress outcomes in infants and children: a systematic review

The aim of the present study was to systematically review the recent literature about pain and distress outcomes in children and critically analyze the methodological quality of the reports. The systematic review was based on the PRISMA statement and performed by selecting articles that are indexed in scientific databases. The methodological quality of reports was examined using STROBE statement, for observational studies, and CONSORT statement, for randomized controlled trials. The PedIMMPACT consensus was used to evaluate the psychometric quality of pain instruments. We analyzed 23 empirical studies, including 14 randomized controlled trials, seven cross-sectional studies, and two studies with cohort designs. Fourteen studies included preschool- and schoolchildren, and nine studies included infants. Regarding studies with infants, pain responses were evaluated by heart rate, crying and behavioral observation scales, and distress was evaluated only by salivary cortisol. Four-handed care and sensorial saturation interventions were used to evaluate efficacy to reduce pain and distress responses. Concerning studies with children, both pain and distress responses were evaluated by self- and hetero-reports, behavioral observation and/or physiological measures. Distraction was effective for reducing pain and distress during burn dressing changes and needle procedures, and healing touch intervention reduced distress and pain in chronic patients. All of the studies scored at least 60% in the methodological quality assessment. The pain outcomes included measures of validity that were classified as well-established by the PedIMMPACT. This systematic review gathers scientific evidence of distress-associated pain in children. Pain and distress were measured as distinct constructs, and their associations were poorly analyzed.