Medical School of Nantong University, Nantong, 226001, China.
Obstetrical Department, Affiliated Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, 226001, China.
BMC Pediatr. 2024 Jan 3;24(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s12887-023-04488-y.
To evaluate the effectiveness of different non-pharmacological interventions for pain management in preterm infants and provide high-quality clinical evidence.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of various non-pharmacological interventions for pain management in preterm infants were searched from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from 2000 to the present (updated March 2023). The primary outcome was pain score reported as standardized mean difference (SMD). The secondary outcomes were oxygen saturation and heart rate reported as the same form.
Thirty five RCTs of 2134 preterm infants were included in the meta-analysis, involving 6 interventions: olfactory stimulation, combined oral sucrose and non-nutritive sucking (OS + NNS), facilitated tucking, auditory intervention, tactile relief, and mixed intervention. Based on moderate-quality evidence, OS + NNS (OR: 3.92, 95% CI: 1.72, 6.15, SUCRA score: 0.73), facilitated tucking (OR: 2.51, 95% CI: 1.15, 3.90, SUCRA score: 0.29), auditory intervention (OR: 2.48, 95% CI: 0.91, 4.10, SUCRA score: 0.27), olfactory stimulation (OR: 1.80, 95% CI: 0.51, 3.14, SUCRA score: 0.25), and mixed intervention (OR: 2.26, 95% CI: 0.10, 4.38, SUCRA score: 0.14) were all superior to the control group for pain relief. For oxygen saturation, facilitated tucking (OR: 1.94, 95% CI: 0.66, 3.35, SUCRA score: 0.64) and auditory intervention (OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.22, 2.04, SUCRA score: 0.36) were superior to the control. For heart rate, none of the comparisons between the various interventions were statistically significant.
This study showed that there are notable variations in the effectiveness of different non-pharmacological interventions in terms of pain scores and oxygen saturation. However, there was no evidence of any improvement in heart rate.
评估不同非药物干预措施在早产儿疼痛管理中的有效性,并提供高质量的临床证据。
从 2000 年到现在(更新于 2023 年 3 月),在 PubMed、Web of Science、Embase 和 Cochrane Library 中检索了各种非药物干预措施治疗早产儿疼痛的随机对照试验(RCT)。主要结局为疼痛评分,以标准化均数差(SMD)表示。次要结局为氧饱和度和心率,均以相同形式表示。
共有 35 项 RCT 纳入 2134 例早产儿,涉及 6 种干预措施:嗅觉刺激、口服蔗糖联合非营养性吸吮(OS+NNS)、促进包裹、听觉干预、触觉缓解和混合干预。基于中等质量证据,OS+NNS(OR:3.92,95%CI:1.72,6.15,SUCRA 评分:0.73)、促进包裹(OR:2.51,95%CI:1.15,3.90,SUCRA 评分:0.29)、听觉干预(OR:2.48,95%CI:0.91,4.10,SUCRA 评分:0.27)、嗅觉刺激(OR:1.80,95%CI:0.51,3.14,SUCRA 评分:0.25)和混合干预(OR:2.26,95%CI:0.10,4.38,SUCRA 评分:0.14)均优于对照组的疼痛缓解。对于氧饱和度,促进包裹(OR:1.94,95%CI:0.66,3.35,SUCRA 评分:0.64)和听觉干预(OR:1.04,95%CI:0.22,2.04,SUCRA 评分:0.36)优于对照组。对于心率,各种干预措施之间的比较均无统计学意义。
本研究表明,不同非药物干预措施在疼痛评分和氧饱和度方面的有效性存在显著差异。然而,在心率方面没有证据表明任何改善。