Validity and Reliability of Pain and Behavioral Scales for Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the instruments used to assess behavior, stress, and/or pain in preterm newborns in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and verify the validity and reliability of these instruments. DATA SOURCES: Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS), and EBSCOhost Research Platform. 12,295 records were found. REVIEW/ANALYSIS METHODS: 37 studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria.  The COnsensus-based Standards for selecting health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was used to assess the quality assessment and measurement properties. RESULTS: We identified 25 scales that assessed behavior, pain, and/or stress in preterm newborns. The Behavioral Indicators of Infant Pain (BIPP), Crying, Requires Oxygen, Increased Vital Signs, Expression, Sleeplessness (CRIES), Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP), and Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R) had scored "very good" in quality data. The PIPP and PIPP-R scales received the "very good" classification in validity assessment. The Evaluation Enfant Douleur (EVENDOL), Children's and Infants Postoperative Pain Scale (CHIPPS), PIPP-R, Neonatal Pain Agitation and Sedation Scale (N-PASS), Bernese Pain Scale for Neonates (BPSN), Faceless Acute Neonatal Pain Scale (FANS), BIIP, and Pain Assessment Scale for Preterm Infants (PASPI) obtained an assessment classified as excellent on reliability, both for inter-rater reliability and internal consistency, and the BPSN demonstrated a very strong value to intra-rater reliability. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the assessments of inter-rater reliability, internal consistency, and quality of scales by COSMIN, the BIPP, and PIPP-R, were the scales considered appropriate.

Respiratory Therapeutic Strategies in Children and Adolescents with COVID-19: A Critical Review.

Evidence on the treatment strategies for the child population with critical conditions due to COVID-19 is scarce and lacks consensus. Thus, this study aimed to critically review non-pharmacological respiratory strategies for this population. Original studies were searched in six databases considering predefined inclusion criteria. Other studies and recommendations were also included after a manual search. Oxygen therapy, invasive (IMV) and non-invasive (NIV) ventilation were the most frequently addressed interventions. In general, the original studies have cited these strategies, but detailed information on the parameters used was not provided. The recommendations provided more detailed data, mainly based on experiences with other acute respiratory syndromes in childhood. In the context of oxygen therapy, the nasal catheter was the most recommended strategy for hypoxemia, followed by the high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC). However, the risks of contamination due to the dispersion of aerosols in the case of the HFNC were pointed out. Lung protective IMV with the use of bacteriological or viral filters was recommended in most documents, and there was great variation in PEEP titration. Alveolar recruitment maneuvers were mentioned in a few recommendations. NIV was not consensual among studies, and when selected, several precautions must be taken to avoid contamination. Airway suctioning with a closed-circuit was recommended to reduce aerosol spread. Information on prone positioning and physiotherapy was even more scarce. In conclusion, oxygen therapy seems to be essential in the treatment of hypoxemia. If necessary, IMV should not be delayed, and protective strategies are encouraged for adequate pulmonary ventilation. Information about techniques that are adjuvant to ventilatory support is superficial and requires further investigation.