-
Intensive & Critical Care Nursing Jun 2024To identify the most effective non-pharmacological measures for pain control in preterm infants in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To identify the most effective non-pharmacological measures for pain control in preterm infants in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU).
METHODS
A Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials published in English, Portuguese, and Spanish from April 2020 to December 2023. The data sources used were MedLine via PubMed, LILACS, EMBASE, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Pedro. We performed the risk of bias analysis with Rob 2 and the certainty of the evidence and strength of the recommendation using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. We assessed heterogeneity using the Higgins and Thompson I test, the classification of interventions using the P-score, and inconsistencies using the Direct Evidence Plot.
RESULTS
From 210 publications identified, we utilized 12 studies in analysis with 961 preterm infants, and we combined ten studies in network meta-analysis with 716 preterm infants, and 12 combinations of non-pharmacological measures. With moderate confidence, sensory saturation, sugars, non-nutritive sucking, maternal heart sound, lullaby, breast milk odor/taste, magnetic acupuncture, skin-to-skin contact, and facilitated tucking have been shown to reduce pain in preterm infants when compared to no intervention, placebo, proparacaine or standard NICU routine: sensory saturation [SMD 5,25 IC 95%: -8,98; -1,53], sugars [SMD 2,32 IC 95%: -3,86; -0,79], pacifier [SMD 3,74 IC 95%: -7,30; 0,19], and sugars and pacifier SMD [3,88 IC 95% -7,72; -0,04].
CONCLUSION
Non-pharmacological measures are strongly recommended for pain management in preterm infants in the NICU.
IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE
The findings of this study have important implications for policy and practice. This is the only systematic review that compared the effectiveness of non-pharmacological measures, thus making it possible to identify which measure presents the best results and could be the first choice in clinical decision making.
PubMed: 38852240
DOI: 10.1016/j.iccn.2024.103742 -
World Journal of Pediatrics : WJP May 2024Comprehensive quantitative evidence on the risk and protective factors for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) effects is lacking. We investigated the risk and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Comprehensive quantitative evidence on the risk and protective factors for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) effects is lacking. We investigated the risk and protective factors related to SIDS.
METHODS
We conducted an umbrella review of meta-analyses of observational and interventional studies assessing SIDS-related factors. PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, EBSCO, and Google Scholar were searched from inception until January 18, 2023. Data extraction, quality assessment, and certainty of evidence were assessed by using A Measurement Tool Assessment Systematic Reviews 2 following PRISMA guidelines. According to observational evidence, credibility was graded and classified by class and quality of evidence (CE; convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or not significant). Our study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023458696). The risk and protective factors related to SIDS are presented as equivalent odds ratios (eORs).
RESULTS
We identified eight original meta-analyses, including 152 original articles, covering 12 unique risk and protective factors for SIDS across 21 countries/regions and five continents. Several risk factors, including prenatal drug exposure [eOR = 7.84 (95% CI = 4.81-12.79), CE = highly suggestive], prenatal opioid exposure [9.55 (95% CI = 4.87-18.72), CE = suggestive], prenatal methadone exposure [9.52 (95% CI = 3.34-27.10), CE = weak], prenatal cocaine exposure [4.38 (95% CI = 1.95-9.86), CE = weak], prenatal maternal smoking [2.25 (95% CI = 1.95-2.60), CE = highly suggestive], postnatal maternal smoking [1.97 (95% CI = 1.75-2.22), CE = weak], bed sharing [2.89 (95% CI = 1.81-4.60), CE = weak], and infants found with heads covered by bedclothes after last sleep [11.01 (95% CI = 5.40-22.45), CE = suggestive], were identified. On the other hand, three protective factors, namely, breastfeeding [0.57 (95% CI = 0.39-0.83), CE = non-significant], supine sleeping position [0.48 (95% CI = 0.37-0.63), CE = suggestive], and pacifier use [0.44 (95% CI = 0.30-0.65), CE = weak], were also identified.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the evidence, we propose several risk and protective factors for SIDS. This study suggests the need for further studies on SIDS-related factors supported by weak credibility, no association, or a lack of adequate research.
Topics: Female; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects; Protective Factors; Risk Factors; Sudden Infant Death
PubMed: 38684567
DOI: 10.1007/s12519-024-00806-1 -
The Journal of Clinical Pediatric... Mar 2024The development of the craniomandibular system is guided by genetic interactions and environmental factors, including specific habits such as breastfeeding, bottle...
The development of the craniomandibular system is guided by genetic interactions and environmental factors, including specific habits such as breastfeeding, bottle feeding, thumb sucking and the use of pacifiers. These habits can have a considerable impact on the growth of the developing jaws and can lead to malocclusion in children. This review aims to investigate potential associations between non-nutritive sucking habits (NNSHs) and malocclusions compared to the presence of nutritive sucking habits (NSHs). To carry out this systematic review, we followed the PRISMA protocol and performed a bibliographic search of the existing literature until April 2023 in the following electronic databases: Medline, PubMed, The Cochrane Library and Embase. Out of a total of 153 records, we included 21 studies. We found that the chances of diagnosing a malocclusion were higher for children with bottle nutrition when compared to breast-fed children. Breastfeeding provides protection against malocclusions. In the same manner, persistent NNSH habits appeared to be associated with increased chances of having malocclusions. The longer the child was breastfed, the shorter the duration of the pacifier habit and the lower the risk of developing moderate/severe malocclusions. The duration of the habits has a positive influence on the appearance of occlusion defects.
Topics: Child; Female; Humans; Sucking Behavior; Malocclusion; Breast Feeding; Bottle Feeding; Habits; Fingersucking; Pacifiers
PubMed: 38548628
DOI: 10.22514/jocpd.2024.029 -
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