-
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Mar 2021To describe the comparative efficacy of drug and non-drug interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia who experience depression as a... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To describe the comparative efficacy of drug and non-drug interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia who experience depression as a neuropsychiatric symptom of dementia or have a diagnosis of a major depressive disorder.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and grey literature between inception and 15 October 2020.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION
Randomised trials comparing drug or non-drug interventions with usual care or any other intervention targeting symptoms of depression in people with dementia.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Pairs of reviewers screened studies, abstracted aggregate level data, and appraised risk of bias with the Cochrane risk of bias tool, which facilitated the derivation of standardised mean differences and back transformed mean differences (on the Cornell scale for depression in dementia) from bayesian random effects network meta-analyses and pairwise meta-analyses.
RESULTS
Of 22 138 citations screened, 256 studies (28 483 people with dementia) were included. Missing data posed the greatest risk to review findings. In the network meta-analysis of studies including people with dementia without a diagnosis of a major depressive disorder who were experiencing symptoms of depression (213 studies; 25 177 people with dementia; between study variance 0.23), seven interventions were associated with a greater reduction in symptoms of depression compared with usual care: cognitive stimulation (mean difference -2.93, 95% credible interval -4.35 to -1.52), cognitive stimulation combined with a cholinesterase inhibitor (-11.39, -18.38 to -3.93), massage and touch therapy (-9.03, -12.28 to -5.88), multidisciplinary care (-1.98, -3.80 to -0.16), occupational therapy (-2.59, -4.70 to -0.40), exercise combined with social interaction and cognitive stimulation (-12.37, -19.01 to -5.36), and reminiscence therapy (-2.30, -3.68 to -0.93). Except for massage and touch therapy, cognitive stimulation combined with a cholinesterase inhibitor, and cognitive stimulation combined with exercise and social interaction, which were more efficacious than some drug interventions, no statistically significant difference was found in the comparative efficacy of drug and non-drug interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia without a diagnosis of a major depressive disorder. Clinical and methodological heterogeneity precluded network meta-analysis of studies comparing the efficacy of interventions specifically for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia and a major depressive disorder (22 studies; 1829 patients).
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, non-drug interventions were found to be more efficacious than drug interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia without a major depressive disorder.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42017050130.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Combined Modality Therapy; Dementia; Depression; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Social Support; Therapy, Soft Tissue
PubMed: 33762262
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n532 -
Medical Sciences (Basel, Switzerland) Jan 2023Most individuals affected by cancer who are treated with certain chemotherapies suffer of CIPN. Therefore, there is a high patient and provider interest in... (Review)
Review
Prevention and Treatment of Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN) with Non-Pharmacological Interventions: Clinical Recommendations from a Systematic Scoping Review and an Expert Consensus Process.
Most individuals affected by cancer who are treated with certain chemotherapies suffer of CIPN. Therefore, there is a high patient and provider interest in complementary non-pharmacological therapies, but its evidence base has not yet been clearly pointed out in the context of CIPN. The results of a scoping review overviewing the published clinical evidence on the application of complementary therapies for improving the complex CIPN symptomatology are synthesized with the recommendations of an expert consensus process aiming to draw attention to supportive strategies for CIPN. The scoping review, registered at PROSPERO 2020 (CRD 42020165851), followed the PRISMA-ScR and JBI guidelines. Relevant studies published in Pubmed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PEDro, Cochrane CENTRAL, and CINAHL between 2000 and 2021 were included. CASP was used to evaluate the methodologic quality of the studies. Seventy-five studies with mixed study quality met the inclusion criteria. Manipulative therapies (including massage, reflexology, therapeutic touch), rhythmical embrocations, movement and mind-body therapies, acupuncture/acupressure, and TENS/Scrambler therapy were the most frequently analyzed in research and may be effective treatment options for CIPN. The expert panel approved 17 supportive interventions, most of them were phytotherapeutic interventions including external applications and cryotherapy, hydrotherapy, and tactile stimulation. More than two-thirds of the consented interventions were rated with moderate to high perceived clinical effectiveness in therapeutic use. The evidence of both the review and the expert panel supports a variety of complementary procedures regarding the supportive treatment of CIPN; however, the application on patients should be individually weighed in each case. Based on this meta-synthesis, interprofessional healthcare teams may open up a dialogue with patients interested in non-pharmacological treatment options to tailor complementary counselling and treatments to their needs.
Topics: Humans; Antineoplastic Agents; Consensus; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Neoplasms; Complementary Therapies
PubMed: 36810482
DOI: 10.3390/medsci11010015 -
Complementary Therapies in Medicine Mar 2020This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of CAM interventions for cancer-related pain in breast cancer patients.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of CAM interventions for cancer-related pain in breast cancer patients.
METHODS
Databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE) were searched from January 1, 2000, up to April 31, 2019, using the keywords: Complementary and alternative medicine therapies and cancer related pain. Standard tools were used to evaluate the quality of the studies included.
RESULTS
Of the 3742 articles found, 46 articles comprising 3685 participants entered the final phase. Our results indicate that interventions including acupuncture/acupressure, tai chi/qi gong, hypnosis, meditation, music therapy, yoga, massage, reflexology, and Reiki improve cancer-related pain in breast cancer patients. However, aromatherapy had no effect on the same.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite the positive effect of various CAM interventions in reducing cancer-related pain, necessary precautions should be adopted to use them alongside other treatments to control cancer pain in the clinical setting.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Cancer Pain; Complementary Therapies; Female; Humans
PubMed: 32147038
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2020.102318 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2020Pain after caesarean sections (CS) can affect the well-being of the mother and her ability with her newborn. Conventional pain-relieving strategies are often underused... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Pain after caesarean sections (CS) can affect the well-being of the mother and her ability with her newborn. Conventional pain-relieving strategies are often underused because of concerns about the adverse maternal and neonatal effects. Complementary alternative therapies (CAM) may offer an alternative for post-CS pain.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of CAM for post-caesarean pain.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, LILACS, PEDro, CAMbase, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (6 September 2019), and checked the reference lists of retrieved articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including quasi-RCTs and cluster-RCTs, comparing CAM, alone or associated with other forms of pain relief, versus other treatments or placebo or no treatment, for the treatment of post-CS pain.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently performed study selection, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 37 studies (3076 women) which investigated eight different CAM therapies for post-CS pain relief. There is substantial heterogeneity among the trials. We downgraded the certainty of evidence due to small numbers of women participating in the trials and to risk of bias related to lack of blinding and inadequate reporting of randomisation processes. None of the trials reported pain at six weeks after discharge. Primary outcomes were pain and adverse effects, reported per intervention below. Secondary outcomes included vital signs, rescue analgesic requirement at six weeks after discharge; all of which were poorly reported, not reported, or we are uncertain as to the effect Acupuncture or acupressure We are very uncertain if acupuncture or acupressure (versus no treatment) or acupuncture or acupressure plus analgesia (versus placebo plus analgesia) has any effect on pain because the quality of evidence is very low. Acupuncture or acupressure plus analgesia (versus analgesia) may reduce pain at 12 hours (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.64 to 0.07; 130 women; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) and 24 hours (SMD -0.63, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.26; 2 studies; 130 women; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether acupuncture or acupressure (versus no treatment) or acupuncture or acupressure plus analgesia (versus analgesia) has any effect on the risk of adverse effects because the quality of evidence is very low. Aromatherapy Aromatherapy plus analgesia may reduce pain when compared with placebo plus analgesia at 12 hours (mean difference (MD) -2.63 visual analogue scale (VAS), 95% CI -3.48 to -1.77; 3 studies; 360 women; low-certainty evidence) and 24 hours (MD -3.38 VAS, 95% CI -3.85 to -2.91; 1 study; 200 women; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if aromatherapy plus analgesia has any effect on adverse effects (anxiety) compared with placebo plus analgesia. Electromagnetic therapy Electromagnetic therapy may reduce pain compared with placebo plus analgesia at 12 hours (MD -8.00, 95% CI -11.65 to -4.35; 1 study; 72 women; low-certainty evidence) and 24 hours (MD -13.00 VAS, 95% CI -17.13 to -8.87; 1 study; 72 women; low-certainty evidence). Massage We identified six studies (651 women), five of which were quasi-RCTs, comparing massage (foot and hand) plus analgesia versus analgesia. All the evidence relating to pain, adverse effects (anxiety), vital signs and rescue analgesic requirement was very low-certainty. Music Music plus analgesia may reduce pain when compared with placebo plus analgesia at one hour (SMD -0.84, 95% CI -1.23 to -0.46; participants = 115; studies = 2; I = 0%; low-certainty evidence), 24 hours (MD -1.79, 95% CI -2.67 to -0.91; 1 study; 38 women; low-certainty evidence), and also when compared with analgesia at one hour (MD -2.11, 95% CI -3.11 to -1.10; 1 study; 38 women; low-certainty evidence) and at 24 hours (MD -2.69, 95% CI -3.67 to -1.70; 1 study; 38 women; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether music plus analgesia has any effect on adverse effects (anxiety), when compared with placebo plus analgesia because the quality of evidence is very low. Reiki We are uncertain if Reiki plus analgesia compared with analgesia alone has any effect on pain, adverse effects, vital signs or rescue analgesic requirement because the quality of evidence is very low (one study, 90 women). Relaxation Relaxation may reduce pain compared with standard care at 24 hours (MD -0.53 VAS, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.01; 1 study; 60 women; low-certainty evidence). Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation TENS (versus no treatment) may reduce pain at one hour (MD -2.26, 95% CI -3.35 to -1.17; 1 study; 40 women; low-certainty evidence). TENS plus analgesia (versus placebo plus analgesia) may reduce pain compared with placebo plus analgesia at one hour (SMD -1.10 VAS, 95% CI -1.37 to -0.82; 3 studies; 238 women; low-certainty evidence) and at 24 hours (MD -0.70 VAS, 95% CI -0.87 to -0.53; 108 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). TENS plus analgesia (versus placebo plus analgesia) may reduce heart rate (MD -7.00 bpm, 95% CI -7.63 to -6.37; 108 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence) and respiratory rate (MD -1.10 brpm, 95% CI -1.26 to -0.94; 108 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if TENS plus analgesia (versus analgesia) has any effect on pain at six hours or 24 hours, or vital signs because the quality of evidence is very low (two studies, 92 women).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Some CAM therapies may help reduce post-CS pain for up to 24 hours. The evidence on adverse events is too uncertain to make any judgements on safety and we have no evidence about the longer-term effects on pain. Since pain control is the most relevant outcome for post-CS women and their clinicians, it is important that future studies of CAM for post-CS pain measure pain as a primary outcome, preferably as the proportion of participants with at least moderate (30%) or substantial (50%) pain relief. Measuring pain as a dichotomous variable would improve the certainty of evidence and it is easy to understand for non-specialists. Future trials also need to be large enough to detect effects on clinical outcomes; measure other important outcomes as listed lin this review, and use validated scales.
Topics: Acupressure; Acupuncture Analgesia; Adolescent; Adult; Analgesia, Obstetrical; Analgesics; Aromatherapy; Bias; Cesarean Section; Combined Modality Therapy; Complementary Therapies; Female; Humans; Massage; Music Therapy; Pain, Postoperative; Placebos; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Relaxation Therapy; Therapeutic Touch; Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation; Young Adult
PubMed: 32871021
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011216.pub2 -
Holistic Nursing PracticePain, the most common and major source of fear in patients with cancer, reduces the quality of life. This systematic review was conducted to determine the effect of... (Review)
Review
Pain, the most common and major source of fear in patients with cancer, reduces the quality of life. This systematic review was conducted to determine the effect of Reiki on pain applied to patients with cancer. The creation of a systematic review protocol and the writing of the article were based on the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) criteria. The literature review was carried out in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases. Seven experimental and quasi-experimental studies met the inclusion criteria, and a total of 572 patients with cancer with sample sizes ranging from 18 to 180 were included. In-person Reiki was applied in 6 of the studies included in the systematic review, while in one of them, distance Reiki was applied. Although Reiki was found to reduce pain in 5 studies included in the review, it was determined that it was not effective on pain in 2 studies. A limited number of studies show that Reiki applied to patients with cancer has a positive effect on pain. It is recommended to conduct more randomized controlled trials with a high methodological quality that examine the effectiveness of Reiki application for patients with cancer.
Topics: Humans; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Neoplasms; Pain; Quality of Life; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Therapeutic Touch
PubMed: 37595119
DOI: 10.1097/HNP.0000000000000601 -
Journal of Pain Research 2024This study aims to investigate the current evidence for the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in fibromyalgia (FM). A systematic review was conducted... (Review)
Review
This study aims to investigate the current evidence for the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in fibromyalgia (FM). A systematic review was conducted searching for PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and Web of Science databases. Randomized controlled trials published up to December 2023 in peer-reviewed journals were included. Methodological quality was assessed by the Quality Assessment of Controlled Intervention Studies tool. A total of 216 articles were identified and 15 constituted the final sample. The type of CAM most used was traditional Chinese medicine (60%), and the most common instrument used was the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (60%). Our review was grouped into four themes based on the origin of the therapies: 1) Traditional Chinese Medicine; 2) Japanese natural harmonization (eg, Reiki); 3) Ayurvedic Medicine; and 4) Other non-drug therapies. Our systematic review showed that there is a wide range of CAMs used to treat FM. Most of the clinical trials have shown significant results for the effectiveness of these interventions in both physical and mental health outcomes of FM as compared to control groups. However, the heterogeneity of the interventions and outcomes warrants further studies on this topic.
PubMed: 38746536
DOI: 10.2147/JPR.S450735 -
Frontiers in Psychology 2022Reiki is an energy healing technique or biofield therapy in which an attuned therapist places their hands on or near the client's body and sends energy to the client to...
BACKGROUND
Reiki is an energy healing technique or biofield therapy in which an attuned therapist places their hands on or near the client's body and sends energy to the client to activate the body's ability to heal itself and restore balance. It was developed in Japan at the end of the 19th century by Mikao Usui of Kyoto. Given the enormous international socioeconomic burden of mental health, inexpensive, safe, and evidenced-based treatments would be welcomed. Reiki is safe, inexpensive, and preliminary research suggests it may assist in treating a wide variety of illnesses. Given that Reiki is a biofield therapy, growing in use, and not yet accepted by the dominant biomedical paradigm, it is important to establish its effectiveness over placebo. This study aimed to examine Reiki's effectiveness over placebo in treating symptoms of mental health and to explore parameters for its effectiveness.
METHOD
A systematic review of randomized placebo-controlled trials (RPCTs) examining Reiki's effectiveness in treating symptoms of mental health in adults was conducted through a systematic search of PubMed, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and ProQuest. Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria, and risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's Revised ROB 2 assessment tool. This was followed by a grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluations (GRADE) assessment.
RESULTS
The evidence to date suggests that Reiki consistently demonstrates a greater therapeutic effect over placebo for some symptoms of mental health. The GRADE level of evidence is high for clinically relevant levels of stress and depression, moderate to high for clinically relevant levels of anxiety, low to moderate for normal levels of stress, and low to moderate for burnout, and low for normal levels of depression and anxiety.
CONCLUSION
The results suggest that, Reiki may be more effective in treating some areas of mental health, than placebo, particularly if symptoms are clinically relevant. To date, there are a small number of studies in each area, therefore findings are inconclusive and, more RCTs controlling for placebo in Reiki research are needed. Most included studies were also assessed as having a risk of bias of some concern. Incorporating Reiki as a complementary treatment to mainstream psychotherapy for depression, stress, and anxiety may be appropriate.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/], identifier [CRD42020194311].
PubMed: 35911042
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.897312 -
Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) May 2023(SM) represents a challenging pathogen due to its resistance profile. A systematic review of the available evidence was conducted to evaluate the best treatment of SM... (Review)
Review
UNLABELLED
(SM) represents a challenging pathogen due to its resistance profile. A systematic review of the available evidence was conducted to evaluate the best treatment of SM infections to date, focusing on trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMX), fluoroquinolones (FQs), and tetracycline derivatives (TDs).
MATERIALS
PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase were searched from inception to 30 November 2022. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included clinical failure, adverse events, and length of stay. A random effects meta-analysis was performed. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022321893).
RESULTS
Twenty-four studies, all retrospective, were included. A significant difference in terms of overall mortality was observed when comparing as a monotherapy TMP/SMX versus FQs (odds ratio (OR) 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15-1.86, I = 33%; 11 studies, 2407 patients). The prediction interval (PI) did not touch the no effect line (1.06-1.93), but the results were not robust for the unmeasured confounding (E-value for point estimate of 1.71). When comparing TMP/SMX with TDs, the former showed an association with higher mortality but not significant and with a wide PI (OR 1.95, 95% CI 0.79-4.82, PI 0.01-685.99, I = 0%; 3 studies, 346 patients). Monotherapies in general exerted a protective effect against death opposed to the combination regimens but were not significant (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.41-1.22, PI 0.16-3.08, I = 0%; 4 studies, 438 patients).
CONCLUSIONS
Against SM infections, FQs and, possibly, TDs seem to be reasonable alternative choices to TMP/SMX. Data from clinical trials are urgently needed to better inform therapeutic choices in this setting by also taking into account newer agents.
PubMed: 37237813
DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics12050910 -
The Journal of Hand Surgery... Aug 2022Although numerous surgical techniques have been described and deployed, flexor tenolysis remains one of the most challenging procedures in hand surgery and there is no...
Although numerous surgical techniques have been described and deployed, flexor tenolysis remains one of the most challenging procedures in hand surgery and there is no standardised way of recording the outcomes. The aim of this study is to systematically review the evidence supporting current concepts and outcomes in flexor tenolysis. The systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Medline and EMBASE databases were searched for articles published in English using the keyword search terms 'flexor' or 'tendon' and 'tenolysis' or 'tenoarthrolysis'. A total of 555 articles were listed and further screening provided fourteen studies remaining for final inclusion. The parameters for data extraction included number of digits operated on, age of the patients, initial injury mechanism requiring flexor tenolysis, outcome assessment method, follow-up period, results and complications. The primary outcome was postoperative active range of motion. 556 digits were included across all studies and the age of patients ranged between 1 and 75 years. Eleven out of fourteen of the articles used the Strickland criteria to report their outcomes. Other outcome measures used were total active motion (TAM), Buck-Gramcko and pulp-to-palm distance. In the studies which used the Strickland criteria, the average percentage of outcomes reported as 'good' or 'excellent' was 68% with a range between 45% and 91%. Three other studies used Buck-Gramcko, TAM and pulp-to-palm distance outcome reporting and achieved 72% 'good' or 'excellent', 84% improvement and 30% able to touch distal palm crease respectively. Although the literature contains a limited number of observational studies, the current evidence shows that 68% of well-selected patients who undergo flexor tenolysis achieve a good or excellent outcome as measured by the Strickland criteria. Level III (Therapeutic).
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Child; Child, Preschool; Dissection; Humans; Infant; Middle Aged; Movement; Orthopedic Procedures; Tendon Injuries; Tendons; Young Adult
PubMed: 35965368
DOI: 10.1142/S2424835522500576 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2023Pain in the neonate is associated with acute behavioural and physiological changes. Cumulative pain is associated with morbidities, including adverse neurodevelopmental... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pain in the neonate is associated with acute behavioural and physiological changes. Cumulative pain is associated with morbidities, including adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes. Studies have shown a reduction in changes in physiological parameters and pain score measurements following pre-emptive analgesic administration in neonates experiencing pain or stress. Non-pharmacological measures (such as holding, swaddling and breastfeeding) and pharmacological measures (such as acetaminophen, sucrose and opioids) have been used for analgesia. This is an update of a review first published in 2006 and updated in 2012.
OBJECTIVES
The primary objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of breastfeeding or supplemental breast milk in reducing procedural pain in neonates. The secondary objective was to conduct subgroup analyses based on the type of control intervention, gestational age and the amount of supplemental breast milk given.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and trial registries (ICTRP, ISRCTN and clinicaltrials.gov) in August 2022; searches were limited from 2011 forwards. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs of breastfeeding or supplemental breast milk versus no treatment/other measures in neonates. We included both term (≥ 37 completed weeks postmenstrual age) and preterm infants (< 37 completed weeks' postmenstrual age) up to a maximum of 44 weeks' postmenstrual age. The study must have reported on either physiological markers of pain or validated pain scores.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We assessed the methodological quality of the trials using the information provided in the studies and by personal communication with the authors. We extracted data on relevant outcomes, estimated the effect size and reported this as a mean difference (MD). We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
Of the 66 included studies, 36 evaluated breastfeeding, 29 evaluated supplemental breast milk and one study compared them against each other. The procedures conducted in the studies were: heel lance (39), venipuncture (11), intramuscular vaccination (nine), eye examination for retinopathy of prematurity (four), suctioning (four) and adhesive tape removal as procedure (one). We noted marked heterogeneity in the control interventions and pain assessment measures amongst the studies. Since many studies included multiple arms with breastfeeding/supplemental breast milk as the main comparator, we were not able to synthesise all interventions together. Individual interventions are compared to breastfeeding/supplemental breast milk and reported. The numbers of studies/participants presented with the findings are not taken from pooled analyses (as is usual in Cochrane Reviews), but are the overall totals in each comparison. Overall, the included studies were at low risk of bias except for masking of intervention and outcome assessment, where nearly one-third of studies were at high risk of bias. Breastfeeding versus control Breastfeeding may reduce the increase in heart rate compared to holding by mother, skin-to-skin contact, bottle feeding mother's milk, moderate concentration of sucrose/glucose (20% to 33%) with skin-to-skin contact (low-certainty evidence, 8 studies, 784 participants). Breastfeeding likely reduces the duration of crying compared to no intervention, lying on table, rocking, heel warming, holding by mother, skin-to-skin contact, bottle feeding mother's milk and moderate concentration of glucose (moderate-certainty evidence, 16 studies, 1866 participants). Breastfeeding may reduce percentage time crying compared to holding by mother, skin-to-skin contact, bottle feeding mother's milk, moderate concentration sucrose and moderate concentration of sucrose with skin-to-skin contact (low-certainty evidence, 4 studies, 359 participants). Breastfeeding likely reduces the Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS) score compared to no intervention, holding by mother, heel warming, music, EMLA cream, moderate glucose concentration, swaddling, swaddling and holding (moderate-certainty evidence, 12 studies, 1432 participants). Breastfeeding may reduce the Neonatal Facial Coding System (NFCS) score compared to no intervention, holding, pacifier and moderate concentration of glucose (low-certainty evidence, 2 studies, 235 participants). Breastfeeding may reduce the Douleur Aigue Nouveau-né (DAN) score compared to positioning, holding or placebo (low-certainty evidence, 4 studies, 709 participants). In the majority of the other comparisons there was little or no difference between the breastfeeding and control group in any of the outcome measures. Supplemental breast milk versus control Supplemental breast milk may reduce the increase in heart rate compared to water or no intervention (low-certainty evidence, 5 studies, 336 participants). Supplemental breast milk likely reduces the duration of crying compared to positioning, massage or placebo (moderate-certainty evidence, 11 studies, 1283 participants). Supplemental breast milk results in little or no difference in percentage time crying compared to placebo or glycine (low-certainty evidence, 1 study, 70 participants). Supplemental breast milk results in little or no difference in NIPS score compared to no intervention, pacifier, moderate concentration of sucrose, eye drops, gentle touch and verbal comfort, and breast milk odour and verbal comfort (low-certainty evidence, 3 studies, 291 participants). Supplemental breast milk may reduce NFCS score compared to glycine (overall low-certainty evidence, 1 study, 40 participants). DAN scores were lower when compared to massage and water; no different when compared to no intervention, EMLA and moderate concentration of sucrose; and higher when compared to rocking or pacifier (low-certainty evidence, 2 studies, 224 participants). Due to the high number of comparator interventions, other measures of pain were assessed in a very small number of studies in both comparisons, rendering the evidence of low certainty. The majority of studies did not report on adverse events, considering the benign nature of the intervention. Those that reported on adverse events identified none in any participants. Subgroup analyses were not conducted due to the small number of studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Moderate-/low-certainty evidence suggests that breastfeeding or supplemental breast milk may reduce pain in neonates undergoing painful procedures compared to no intervention/positioning/holding or placebo or non-pharmacological interventions. Low-certainty evidence suggests that moderate concentration (20% to 33%) glucose/sucrose may lead to little or no difference in reducing pain compared to breastfeeding. The effectiveness of breast milk for painful procedures should be studied in the preterm population, as there are currently a limited number of studies that have assessed its effectiveness in this population.
Topics: Female; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Milk, Human; Breast Feeding; Pain, Procedural; Pain; Acetaminophen
PubMed: 37643989
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004950.pub4