• Pain · Dec 2024

    The implementation of infant pain practice change resource to improve infant procedural pain practices: a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation study.

    • Bonnie Stevens, Mariana Bueno, Melanie Barwick, Marsha Campbell-Yeo, Christine Chambers, Carole Estabrooks, Rachel Flynn, Sharyn Gibbins, Denise Harrison, Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai, Sylvie LeMay, Melanie Noel, Jennifer Stinson, Anne Synnes, Charles Victor, and Janet Yamada.
    • The Hospital for Sick Children, Research Institute, Child Health and Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada.
    • Pain. 2024 Dec 6.

    AbstractImplementation of infant pain practice change (ImPaC) is a multifaceted web-based resource to support pain practice change in neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). We evaluated the (1) intervention effectiveness and (2) implementation effectiveness of ImPaC using a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation study (ie, cluster randomized controlled trial and longitudinal descriptive study). Eligible level 2 and 3 Canadian NICUs were randomized to intervention (INT) or waitlisted to usual care (UC) for 6 months. We assessed the number of painful procedures, proportion of procedures accompanied by valid assessment and evidence-based treatment, and pain intensity to determine intervention effectiveness using intention-to-treat (ITT) and wait-list (WL) analyses. Implementation feasibility and fidelity were explored. Twenty-three NICUs participated (12 INT, 11 UC). Thirty infants/NICU were included in the ITT (INT = 354, UC = 325) and the WL (INT = 678, UC = 325) analyses. In the ITT analysis, the average number of painful procedures/infant/day was lower in the INT group [2.62 (±3.47) vs 3.85 (±4.13), P < 0.001] than in the UC group. Pain assessment was greater in the INT group (34.7% vs 25.5%, P < 0.001) and pain intensity scores were lower [1.47 (1.25) vs 1.86 (1.97); P = 0.029]. Similarly, in the WL analysis, there were fewer painful procedures/infant/day [3.11 (±3.98) vs 3.85 (±4.13), P = 0.003] and increased pain assessment (30.4% vs 25.5%, P = 0.0001) and treatment (31.2% vs 24.0%, P < 0.001) in the INT group. Feasibility and implementation fidelity were associated with improved clinical outcomes.Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the International Association for the Study of Pain.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.