Comparative study of bupivacaine alone and bupivacaine along with buprenorphine in axillary brachial plexus block: a prospective, randomized, single blind study

Background: Different additives have been used to prolong brachial plexus block. We performed a prospective, randomized single-blind study to compare Bupivacaine alone and Bupivacaine along with Buprenorphine for onset, quality, and duration of block as well as post-operative analgesia and any complication in axillary brachial- plexus block.Methods: Randomized controlled study was carried out among 60 patients of either sex, aged 20-60 years. ASA grade I or II undergoing elective hand, forearm, elbow surgery under axillary brachial plexus block. Patients were randomly divided into two groups.Group-l received 30 ml of 0.35% Bupivacaine alone in axillary block.Group-II received 30 ml of 0.35% Bupivacaine with 3µg/kg Buprenorphine in axillary block. Time taken for onset and completion of motor and sensory block as well as complete duration of block were noted in both groups. Any complication during procedure, during surgery as well as post-operatively were noted and treated.Results: Addition of Buprenorphine (3µg/kg) to Bupivacaine mixture in peripheral nerve block did not affected the onset time for motor as well as sensory block. Mean duration of motor block was 284.33±78.94 mins. in group I and in group II 307.33±60.26 mins. Mean duration of sensory block 305.066±83.64 mins. in group I while 580.166±111.45 mins. in group II. It suggests duration of sensory block was prolonged in group II then group I.Conclusions: Addition of Buprenorphine to local anesthetic drug provides good post-operative analgesia. Buprenorphine significantly prolongs sensory block and lengthens duration of analgesia without prolonging duration of motor block

Variability in clinical practice guidelines for sweetening agents in newborn infants undergoing painful procedures

Objective: Sweetening agents have been recommended in position statements and consensus documents for procedural pain management in neonates; however, it is not clear if this has resulted in widespread adoption in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to investigate unit-specific protocols for the use of sweetening agents. Methods: Structured telephone survey with qualified personnel in special care (level II) nurseries and neonatal intensive care (level III) units across Canada. The frequency and pattern of recommended use of sweetening agents was documented. Results: Eighty-six of 92 units (93.5%) participated. Sixty-four percent recommended sucrose and 2.3% recommended glucose for procedural pain management; 87.7% had a guideline. Sweetening agents were most commonly recommended for venipuncture/ venous cannulation (91.2% for both), lumbar puncture (87.7%), and heel lance (82.5%). Dosing guidelines ranged from 0.05mL of 24% sucrose solution to 3mL of 25% sucrose solution. Sweeteners were not recommended for infants with necrotizing enterocolitis (77.2%) or those who were nil per os (75%). Conclusions: Sweetening agents were recommended for procedural pain management in two-thirds of special care nurseries and neonatal intensive care units across Canada with extensive variability in specific dosing guidelines. Audits of pain management practices should therefore account for unit-specific practice guidelines.This study was supported by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) research studentship to Ms A Yiu, a CIHR New Investigator Award to Dr A Taddio, and a CIHR Canada Research Chair in Health Psychology to Dr J Katz. The funding did not include any input into the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of data; preparation, review, or approval of manuscript. There are no conflicts of interest

Study of role of blood transfusion in obstetric emergencies

Background: Blood Transfusion is recognized as one of the eight essential component of comprehensive emergency obstetric care which has been shown to reduce the maternal mortality.1,2 In developing country like India, efforts should be done to make blood and transfusion services well maintained and quickly available to reduce maternal morbidity from haemorrhage and thus decrease the incidence of maternal mortality. Aims & objectives: (1) To study clinical status of the patients at time of admission. (2) To study the role of antenatal visits in all patients required blood transfusion. (3) To study the effect of blood components on the patients’ health. (4) To screen out the patients of high risk pregnancy and treat them safely. (5) To study causes of maternal mortality.Methods: Retrospective study of requirement of blood transfusion in antenatal and postnatal patients who came in labour room during last 3 month period at tertiary care Centre, Ahmedabad.Results: during the whole study out of 2200 patients 440 patients required blood transfusion among which 70% required due to obstetric hemorrhage and 30% due to severe anemia (less than 7 gm/dl). Major associated complications in the transfused patients were anemia (34%) and PPH (36%). 4 patients expired among them 2 were due to development of DIC and septicemia, 1 due to severe anemia and 1 due to severe PPH.Conclusions: Ensuring a safe supply of blood and blood products and the appropriate and rational clinical use of blood. Strategies made to maximize the haemoglobin (Hb) level at the time of delivery as well as to minimize blood loss. Active management of the third stage of labour is required to prevent avoidable morbidities, such as PPH, Retained product of conception, and vaginal lacerations.

Psychological interventions for vaccine injections in young children 0 to 3 years: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized controlled trials

Background: This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of distraction for reducing infant distress during vaccinations in young children aged 0 to 3 years. Design/Methods: Database searches identified relevant randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials. Three separate clinical questions related to variants of the psychological strategy of distraction (directed video; directed toy; nondirected toy) were pursued. Distress was identified as the critical outcome to assess the benefits of distraction and extracted from relevant trials. Distress was analyzed by phase of procedure (distress preprocedure; distress acute; distress recovery; idiosyncratic phases based on some or all of the 3 aforementioned phases). Results: Ten studies were included in the review. Significant results are presented herein. For directed video distraction, moderate quality evidence suggested that distress was lowered in the treatment group standardized mean difference (SMD -0.68 lower [95% confidence interval (CI), -1.04 to -0.32]) for the acute+recovery phase as well as the preprocedure phase (SMD -0.49 lower [95% CI, -7.6 to -0.22]). For directed toy distraction, the analysis of low-quality evidence for a combined preprocedure+acute+ recovery phase of distress (analysis n=81), suggested that distress was lowered in the treatment group (SMD -0.47 lower [95% CI, -0.91 to -0.02]). An effect for nondirected toy distraction was also seen, analyzing very-low-quality evidence, for the acute distress phase (n=290; SMD -0.93 lower [95% CI, -1.86 to 0.00]). Conclusion: Generally low-quality to very-low-quality evidence suggests that there may be an effect of directed (toy and video) and nondirected toy distraction for children aged 0 to 3 years, for certain phases of the vaccination

Student feedback to tailor the card™ system for improving the immunization experience at school

Increasing the comfort of vaccine delivery at school is needed to improve the immunization experience for students. We created the CARD™ (C—Comfort, A—Ask, R—Relax and D—Distract) system to address this clinical care gap. Originally designed for grade 7 students, this study examined the perceptions of grade 9 students of CARD™. Grade 9 students who had experience with school-based immunizations, either as recipients or onlookers (n = 7; 100% females 14 years old) participated. Students answered pre–post surveys, reviewed CARD™ educational materials and participated in a semi-structured focus group discussion. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used as the framework for analysis of qualitative data. Participants reported positive perceptions of CARD™ educational materials and that CARD™ could fit into the school immunization process. CARD™ improved knowledge about effective coping interventions and was recommended for education of both nurses and students. The results provide preliminary evidence that CARD™ is acceptable and appropriate for implementation in grade 9 school-based immunizations

Pharmacological and combined interventions to reduce vaccine injection pain in children and adults systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: This systematic review assessed the effectiveness and safety of pharmacotherapy and combined interventions for reducing vaccine injection pain in individuals across the lifespan. Design/Methods: Electronic databases were searched for relevant randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials. Self-reported pain and fear as well as observer-rated distress were critically important outcomes. Data were combined using standardized mean difference (SMD) or relative risk with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Fifty-five studies that examined breastfeeding (which combines sweet-tasting solution, holding, and sucking), topical anesthetics, sweet-tasting solutions (sucrose, glucose), vapocoolants, oral analgesics, and combination of 2 versus 1 intervention were included. The following results report findings of analyses of critical outcomes with the largest number of participants. Compared with control, acute distress was lower for infants breastfed: (1) during vaccination (n=792): SMD -1.78 (CI, -2.35, -1.22) and (2) before vaccination (n=100): SMD -1.43 (CI, -2.14, -0.72). Compared with control/placebo, topical anesthetics showed benefit on acute distress in children (n=1424): SMD -0.91 (CI, -1.36, -0.47) and self-reported pain in adults (n=60): SMD -0.85 (CI, -1.38, -0.32). Acute and recovery distress was lower for children who received sucrose (n=2071): SMD -0.76 (CI, -1.19, -0.34) or glucose (n=818): SMD -0.69 (CI, -1.03, -0.35) compared with placebo/no treatment. Vapocoolants reduced acute pain in adults [(n=185), SMD -0.78 (CI, -1.08, -0.48)] but not children. Evidence from other needle procedures showed no benefit of acetaminophen or ibuprofen. The administration of topical anesthetics before and breastfeeding during vaccine injections showed mixed results when compared with topical anesthetics alone. There were no additive benefits of combining glucose and non-nutritive sucking (pacifier) compared with glucose or non-nutritive sucking (pacifier) alone or breastfeeding and sucrose compared with breastfeeding or sucrose alone. Conclusions: Breastfeeding, topical anesthetics, sweet-tasting solutions, and combination of topical anesthetics and breastfeeding demonstrated evidence of benefit for reducing vaccine injection pain in infants and children. In adults, limited data demonstrate some benefit of topical anesthetics and vapocoolants

Methodology for knowledge synthesis of the management of vaccination pain and needle fear

Background: A knowledge synthesis was undertaken to inform the development of a revised and expanded clinical practice guideline about managing vaccination pain in children to include the management of pain across the lifespan and the management of fear in individuals with high levels of needle fear. This manuscript describes the methodological details of the knowledge synthesis and presents the list of included clinical questions, critical and important outcomes, search strategy, and search strategy results. Methods: The Grading of Assessments, Recommendations, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and Cochrane methodologies provided the general framework. The project team voted on clinical questions for inclusion and critically important and important outcomes. A broad search strategy was used to identify relevant randomized-controlled trials and quasi-randomized-controlled trials. Quality of research evidence was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and quality across studies was assessed using GRADE. Multiple measures of the same construct within studies (eg, observer-rated and parent-rated infant distress) were combined before pooling. The standardized mean difference and 95% confidence intervals (CI) or relative risk and 95% CI was used to express the effects of an intervention. Results: Altogether, 55 clinical questions were selected for inclusion in the knowledge synthesis; 49 pertained to pain management during vaccine injections and 6 pertained to fear management in individuals with high levels of needle fear. Pain, fear, and distress were typically prioritized as critically important outcomes across clinical questions. The search strategy identified 136 relevant studies. Conclusions: This manuscript describes the methodological details of a knowledge synthesis about pain management during vaccination and fear management in individuals with high levels of needle fear. Subsequent manuscripts in this series will present the results for the included questions

Feasibility of implementation of CARD™ for school-based immunizations in Calgary, Alberta: a cluster trial

Background: Negative experiences with school-based immunizations can contribute to vaccine hesitancy in youth and adulthood. We developed an evidence-based, multifaceted and customizable intervention to improve the immunization experience at school called the CARD™ (C-Comfort, A-Ask, R-Relax, D-Distract) system. We evaluated the feasibility of CARD™ implementation for school-based immunizations in Calgary, Canada. Methods: In a mixed methods study, two Community Health Centres providing immunization services, including 5 schools each with grade 9 students (aged approximately 14 years), were randomized to CARD™ or control (usual care). In the CARD™ group, public health staff and students were educated about coping strategies prior to immunization clinics. Clinics were organized to reduce fear and to support student’s choices for coping strategies. Public health staff in the CARD™ group participated in a focus group discussion afterwards. We sought a recruitment rate of 80% for eligible schools, an external stakeholder focus group (e.g., school staff) with 6 or more individuals, 85% of individual injection-related data acquisition (student and immunizer surveys), and 80% absolute agreement between raters for a subset of data that were double-coded. Across focus groups, we examined perceptions of acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility and fidelity of CARD™. Results: Nine (90%) of eligible schools participated. Of 219 students immunized, injection-related student and immunizer data forms were acquired for 195 (89.0%) and 196 (89.5%), respectively. Reliability of data collection was high. Fifteen public health and 5 school staff participated in separate focus groups. Overall, attitudes towards CARD™ were positive and compliance with individual components of CARD™ was high. Public health staff expressed skepticism regarding the value of student participation in the CARD™ system. Suggestions were made regarding processes to refine implementation. Conclusion: While most outcome criteria were satisfied and overall perceptions of implementation outcomes were positive, some important challenges and opportunities were identified. Feedback is being used to inform a large cluster trial that will evaluate the impact of CARD™ during school-based immunizations. Trial registration: The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03948633); Submitted April 24, 2019