FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2945773046> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2945773046 endingPage "480" @default.
• W2945773046 startingPage "479" @default.
• W2945773046 abstract "We refer to the recent study published by Hsieh and colleagues1Hsieh K.H. Chen S.J. Tsao P.C. Wang C.C. Huang C.F. Lin C.M. et al.The analgesic effect of non-pharmacological interventions to reduce procedural pain in preterm neonates.Pediatr Neonatol. 2018; 59: 71-76Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (17) Google Scholar comparing the effects of 10% glucose and expressed breast milk (EBM) on pain scores during heel lance in preterm infants. The enrolled infants underwent four heel lance procedures while receiving EBM, 10% glucose, water, or no intervention. Results demonstrated significantly lower pain scores for the EBM and 10% glucose groups than for the water and no intervention groups. However, all infants obviously experienced moderate pain (e.g., Premature Infant Pain Profile scores higher than 6) during the first 30 s after heel lance irrespective of the allocated group. Nevertheless, the authors concluded that EBM and 10% glucose were effective and safe. Unfortunately, infants included in this study for all the four heel lance procedures were not administered any evidence-based pain treatments that have been already demonstrated to be effective in reducing pain. Extensive research conducted over the past three decades has clearly shown that sweet solutions, if sufficiently sweet, are effective in reducing pain during heel lance in newborns. A systematic review of 35 trials reported that 20%–30% glucose solution reduced pain during painful procedures.2Bueno M. Yamada J. Harrison D. Khan S. Ohlsson A. Adams-Webber T. et al.A systematic review and meta-analyses of non sucrose sweet solutions for pain relief in neonates.Pain Res Manag. 2013; 18: 153-156Crossref PubMed Scopus (97) Google Scholar However, lower concentrations, including 10% glucose, were found to be ineffective across numerous trials.2Bueno M. Yamada J. Harrison D. Khan S. Ohlsson A. Adams-Webber T. et al.A systematic review and meta-analyses of non sucrose sweet solutions for pain relief in neonates.Pain Res Manag. 2013; 18: 153-156Crossref PubMed Scopus (97) Google Scholar Analgesic effects are known to be dependent on sweet taste, which explains why higher concentrated solutions exert superior analgesic effects. Another systematic review of sweet solutions used for neonatal pain, published in Chinese databases, included 31 trials confirming the same results, i.e., small volumes of sweet solutions, as long as they are sufficiently sweet, reduce pain in infants.3Huang R.R. Xie R.H. Wen S.W. Chen S.L. She Q. Liu Y.N. et al.Sweet solutions for analgesia in neonates in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Can J Nurs Res. 2019; 51: 116-127Crossref PubMed Scopus (7) Google Scholar Finally, a systematic review of 168 studies showed that a state of equipoise has not existed in the analgesic effects of sweet tasting solutions for almost 20 years.4Harrison D. Larocque C. Bueno M. Stokes Y. Turner L. Hutton B. et al.Sweet solutions to reduce procedural pain in neonates: a meta-analysis.Pediatrics. 2017; 139 (pii: e20160955)Crossref Scopus (55) Google Scholar On the other hand, results of systematic reviews have consistently demonstrated limited efficacy of EBM for infant procedural pain relief.5Benoit B. Martin-Misener R. Latimer M. Campbell-Yeo M. Breast-feeding analgesia in infants: an update on the current state of evidence.J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2017; 31: 145-159Crossref PubMed Scopus (55) Google Scholar Breast milk contains 7% lactose, which is the least sweet tasting substance and may explain its poor analgesic effects when offered alone. Exposing infants to placebo, no intervention, or interventions already shown to be ineffective, including low concentrations of sweet solutions and EBM, in pain studies can be considered as unethical. Researchers must use the best evidence available to design their studies, and research ethics committees should not approve studies on infant procedural pain where best evidence is not the standard of care. What about parents? Parental consent is required for newborns to participate in research. However, are parents truly informed? Do they know that there is already strong evidence to support sweet solutions that are being tested in these studies? Furthermore, are they informed that there is strong evidence to support breastfeeding and skin–skin care, and that they could be advocating for these strategies for their newborns during painful procedures? Ongoing research should be informed by the best evidence available, including a state of uncertainty. Nevertheless, these principles of equipoise appear not to have been fully considered while conceptualizing and implementing the study of Hsieh and colleagues.1Hsieh K.H. Chen S.J. Tsao P.C. Wang C.C. Huang C.F. Lin C.M. et al.The analgesic effect of non-pharmacological interventions to reduce procedural pain in preterm neonates.Pediatr Neonatol. 2018; 59: 71-76Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (17) Google Scholar Research should focus on implementing the best evidence available into clinical practice while continuing to explore improved methods to consistently reduce newborn pain. The authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to this article. The following is the Supplementary data to this article: Download .xml (.0 MB) Help with xml files Multimedia component 1" @default.
• W2945773046 created "2019-05-29" @default.
• W2945773046 creator A5015077545 @default.
• W2945773046 creator A5054843284 @default.
• W2945773046 date "2019-08-01" @default.
• W2945773046 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W2945773046 title "What happened to the principle of equipoise in the planning, designing and conducting of placebo-controlled trials for neonatal procedural pain?" @default.
• W2945773046 cites W2218854551 @default.
• W2945773046 cites W2564004644 @default.
• W2945773046 cites W2606800814 @default.
• W2945773046 cites W2735888682 @default.
• W2945773046 cites W2901444000 @default.
• W2945773046 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedneo.2019.05.003" @default.
• W2945773046 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31186168" @default.
• W2945773046 hasPublicationYear "2019" @default.
• W2945773046 type Work @default.
• W2945773046 sameAs 2945773046 @default.
• W2945773046 citedByCount "4" @default.
• W2945773046 countsByYear W29457730462019 @default.
• W2945773046 countsByYear W29457730462020 @default.
• W2945773046 countsByYear W29457730462023 @default.
• W2945773046 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2945773046 hasAuthorship W2945773046A5015077545 @default.
• W2945773046 hasAuthorship W2945773046A5054843284 @default.
• W2945773046 hasBestOaLocation W29457730461 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConcept C105702510 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConcept C1862650 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConcept C204787440 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConcept C27081682 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConcept C27415008 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConcept C2777248721 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConcept C2780665704 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConcept C42219234 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConceptScore W2945773046C105702510 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConceptScore W2945773046C118552586 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConceptScore W2945773046C141071460 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConceptScore W2945773046C142724271 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConceptScore W2945773046C168563851 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConceptScore W2945773046C1862650 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConceptScore W2945773046C204787440 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConceptScore W2945773046C27081682 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConceptScore W2945773046C27415008 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConceptScore W2945773046C2777248721 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConceptScore W2945773046C2780665704 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConceptScore W2945773046C42219234 @default.
• W2945773046 hasConceptScore W2945773046C71924100 @default.
• W2945773046 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W2945773046 hasLocation W29457730461 @default.
• W2945773046 hasLocation W29457730462 @default.
• W2945773046 hasOpenAccess W2945773046 @default.
• W2945773046 hasPrimaryLocation W29457730461 @default.
• W2945773046 hasRelatedWork W1987232253 @default.
• W2945773046 hasRelatedWork W2065885647 @default.
• W2945773046 hasRelatedWork W2122578866 @default.
• W2945773046 hasRelatedWork W2333078312 @default.
• W2945773046 hasRelatedWork W2947824637 @default.
• W2945773046 hasRelatedWork W2974411219 @default.
• W2945773046 hasRelatedWork W4249096559 @default.
• W2945773046 hasRelatedWork W4256514411 @default.
• W2945773046 hasRelatedWork W4283776592 @default.
• W2945773046 hasRelatedWork W4283787345 @default.
• W2945773046 hasVolume "60" @default.
• W2945773046 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2945773046 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2945773046 magId "2945773046" @default.
• W2945773046 workType "article" @default.