We have located links that may give you full text access.
Efficacy of facilitated tucking combined with non-nutritive sucking on very preterm infants' pain during the heel-stick procedure: A randomized controlled trial.
International Journal of Nursing Studies 2018 June 16
BACKGROUND: Reducing acute pain in premature infants during neonatal care improves their neurophysiological development. The use of pharmacological and non-pharmacological analgesia, such as sucrose, is limited per day, particularly for very preterm infants. Thus, the usual practice of non-nutritive sucking is often used alone. Facilitated tucking could be an additional strategy to non-nutritive sucking for reducing pain. To the best of our knowledge, no randomized trial has compared the combination of facilitated tucking and non-nutritive sucking to non-nutritive sucking alone.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of facilitated tucking in combination with non-nutritive sucking (intervention group) to non-nutritive sucking alone (control group) in reducing pain during the heel-stick procedure in very preterm infants.
DESIGN: Prospective, randomized controlled trial.
SETTINGS: Level III and II neonatal care units, including the neurosensory care management program.
METHODS: Very preterm infants (gestational age between 28 and 32 weeks) were randomly assigned by a computer programme to the intervention or control group during a heel-stick procedure within the first 48 h of life. In both groups, infants were placed in an asymmetric position on a cushion; noise and light were limited following routine care. A heel-stick was performed first in the care sequence. In the intervention group, facilitated tucking was performed by a nurse or nursing assistant. The procedure was video recorded from 15 s (T-15 s) before the procedure until three minutes (T + 3 min) after the end of the procedure. Pain was blindly assessed by two independent specialist nurses. The primary outcome was the pain score evaluated 15 s before the procedure and 30 s immediately after by the premature infant pain profile (PIPP) scale. The secondary outcome was the pain score evaluated between T-15 s and T + 3 min by the DAN scale (a French acronym for the acute pain of a newborn).
RESULTS: Sixty infants were included (30 in each group). The PIPP pain scores did not differ between the intervention group (median: 8.0; interquartile range (IQR): 6.0-12.0) and the control group (median: 9.5; IQR: 7.0-13.0, p = 0.32). Pain assessed by the DAN scale at T + 3 min was lower in the intervention group than in the control group (median: 0.3; IQR: 0.0-1.0 and 2.0; IQR: 0.5-3.0, respectively, p = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The combined use of facilitated tucking and non-nutritive sucking did not significantly alleviate pain during the heel-stick procedure. However, the addition of facilitated tucking facilitated faster pain recovery following the heel-stick procedure.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of facilitated tucking in combination with non-nutritive sucking (intervention group) to non-nutritive sucking alone (control group) in reducing pain during the heel-stick procedure in very preterm infants.
DESIGN: Prospective, randomized controlled trial.
SETTINGS: Level III and II neonatal care units, including the neurosensory care management program.
METHODS: Very preterm infants (gestational age between 28 and 32 weeks) were randomly assigned by a computer programme to the intervention or control group during a heel-stick procedure within the first 48 h of life. In both groups, infants were placed in an asymmetric position on a cushion; noise and light were limited following routine care. A heel-stick was performed first in the care sequence. In the intervention group, facilitated tucking was performed by a nurse or nursing assistant. The procedure was video recorded from 15 s (T-15 s) before the procedure until three minutes (T + 3 min) after the end of the procedure. Pain was blindly assessed by two independent specialist nurses. The primary outcome was the pain score evaluated 15 s before the procedure and 30 s immediately after by the premature infant pain profile (PIPP) scale. The secondary outcome was the pain score evaluated between T-15 s and T + 3 min by the DAN scale (a French acronym for the acute pain of a newborn).
RESULTS: Sixty infants were included (30 in each group). The PIPP pain scores did not differ between the intervention group (median: 8.0; interquartile range (IQR): 6.0-12.0) and the control group (median: 9.5; IQR: 7.0-13.0, p = 0.32). Pain assessed by the DAN scale at T + 3 min was lower in the intervention group than in the control group (median: 0.3; IQR: 0.0-1.0 and 2.0; IQR: 0.5-3.0, respectively, p = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The combined use of facilitated tucking and non-nutritive sucking did not significantly alleviate pain during the heel-stick procedure. However, the addition of facilitated tucking facilitated faster pain recovery following the heel-stick procedure.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app