Sedation and Pain Management in Burn Patients.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Griggs C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5642992 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Sedation and Pain Management in Burn Patients.
Griggs Cornelia C Goverman Jeremy J Bittner Edward A EA Levi Benjamin B
Clinics in plastic surgery 20170418 3
Although pain management is a major challenge for clinicians, appropriate pain control is the foundation of efficacious burn care from initial injury to long-term recovery. The very treatments designed to treat burn wounds may inflict more pain than the initial injury itself, making it the clinician's duty to embrace a multimodal treatment approach to burn pain. Vigilant pain assessment, meaningful understanding of the pathophysiology and pharmacologic considerations across different phases of b ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Assessing and managing pain and agitation in critically ill children can be challenging. Multiple factors contribute to the challenges of management, including prior medication exposure, surgical and procedural interventions, pharmacokinetics, and age-related pharmacodynamics making the population heterogeneous. Therefore, individualizing treatment approaches embedded with frequent assessments is likely to improve the management of pain and agitation in critically ill children. Novel approaches to manage pain and agitation continue to evolve and will require ongoing evaluation prior to widespread adoption.
| S-EPMC6513151 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective:The mainstay of pain treatment after paediatric cardiac surgery is the use of opioids. Current guidelines for its optimal use are based on small, non-randomised clinical trials, and data on the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of opioids are lacking. This study aims at providing an overview of international hospital practices on the treatment of pain and sedation after paediatric cardiac surgery. Design:A multicentre survey study assessed the management of pain and sedation in children aged 0-18 years after cardiac surgery. Setting:Pediatric intensive care units (PICU)of 19 tertiary children's hospitals worldwide were invited to participate. The focus of the survey was on type and dose of analgesic and sedative drugs and the tools used for their pharmacodynamic assessment. Results:Fifteen hospitals (response rate 79%) filled out the survey. Morphine was the primary analgesic in most hospitals, and its doses for continuous infusion ranged from 10 to 60 mcg kg-1 h-1 in children aged 0-36 months. Benzodiazepines were the first choice for sedation, with midazolam used in all study hospitals. Eight hospitals (53%) reported routine use of sedatives with pain treatment. Overall, type and dosing of analgesic and sedative drugs differed substantially between hospitals. All participating hospitals used validated pain and sedation assessment tools. Conclusion:There was a large variation in the type and dosing of drugs employed in the treatment of pain and sedation after paediatric cardiac surgery. As a consequence, there is a need to rationalise pain and sedation management for this vulnerable patient group.
| S-EPMC5862168 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNewborn infants affected by hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) undergo therapeutic hypothermia. As this treatment seems to be associated with pain, and intensive and invasive care is needed, pharmacological interventions are often used. Moreover, painful procedures in the newborn period can affect pain responses later in life, impair brain development, and possibly have a long-term negative impact on neurodevelopment and quality of life.ObjectivesTo determine the effects of pharmacological interventions for pain and sedation management in newborn infants undergoing therapeutic hypothermia. Primary outcomes were analgesia and sedation, and all-cause mortality to discharge.Search methodsWe searched CENTRAL, PubMed, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and the trial register ISRCTN in August 2021. We also checked the reference lists of relevant articles to identify additional studies.Selection criteriaWe included randomized controlled trials (RCT), quasi-RCTs and cluster-randomized trials comparing drugs used for the management of pain or sedation, or both, during therapeutic hypothermia: any opioids (e.g. morphine, fentanyl), alpha-2 agonists (e.g. clonidine, dexmedetomidine), N-Methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist (e.g. ketamine), other analgesics (e.g. paracetamol), and sedatives (e.g. benzodiazepines such as midazolam) versus another drug, placebo, no intervention, or non-pharmacological interventions. Primary outcomes were analgesia and sedation, and all-cause mortality to discharge.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed studies identified by the search strategy for inclusion. We planned to use the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. We planned to assess the methodological quality of included trials using Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (EPOC) criteria (assessing randomization, blinding, loss to follow-up, and handling of outcome data). We planned to evaluate treatment effects using a fixed-effect model with risk ratio (RR) for categorical data and mean, standard deviation (SD), and mean difference (MD) for continuous data. MAIN RESULTS: We did not find any completed studies for inclusion. Amongst the four excluded studies, topiramate and atropine were used in two and one trial, respectively; one study used dexmedetomidine and was initially reported in 2019 to be a randomized trial. However, it was an observational study (correction in 2021). We identified one ongoing study comparing dexmedetomidine to morphine.Authors' conclusionsWe found no studies that met our inclusion criteria and hence there is no evidence to recommend or refute the use of pharmacological interventions for pain and sedation management in newborn infants undergoing therapeutic hypothermia.
| S-EPMC9647594 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6097223 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Increasing evidence suggests that stress system activation after burn injury may contribute to burn-related pain. If this is the case, then genetic variations influencing the function of important stress system components, such as the enzyme catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT), may predict pain severity after thermal burn injury. The authors evaluated the association between COMT genotype and pain intensity in 57 individuals hospitalized after thermal burn injury. Consenting participants at four burn centers were genotyped and completed daily 0 to 10 numeric rating scale pain assessments on 2 consecutive days including evaluation of waking, least, and worst pain. The association between COMT genotype and individual pain outcomes was calculated using a linear mixed model adjusting for sociodemographic and burn injury characteristics. Overall pain (combination of least, worst, and waking pain scores) was significantly higher in patients with a COMT pain vulnerable genotype (6.3 [0.4] vs 5.4 [0.4], P = .037). Individuals with a COMT pain vulnerable genotype also had significantly higher "least pain" scores (3.8 [0.5] vs 2.6 [0.4], P = .017) and significantly higher pain on awakening (6.8 [0.5] vs 5.3 [0.4], P = .004). Differences in worst pain according to genotype group were not significant. COMT pain vulnerable genotype was a stronger predictor of overall pain severity than burn size, burn depth, or time from admission to pain interview assessment. These findings suggest that genetic factors influencing stress system function may have an important influence on pain severity after burn injury. Further studies of genetic predictors of pain after burn injury are needed.
| S-EPMC3319634 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNeonates in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) undergo a multitude of painful and stressful procedures during the first days of life. Stress from this pain can lead to neurodevelopmental problems that manifest in later childhood and should be prevented.ObjectiveTo determine the number of painful procedures performed per day for each neonate, to verify documentation of painful procedures performed, and to, subsequently, note missed opportunities for providing pain relief to neonates.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study at a level III NICU located in a rural part of western India. A total of 69 neonates admitted for more than 24 h were included. Twenty-nine neonates were directly observed for a total of 24 h each, and another 40 neonatal records were retrospectively reviewed for the neonate's first 7 days of admission. All stressful and painful procedures performed on the neonate were recorded. Also recorded were any pharmaceutical pain relief agents or central nervous system depressants administered to the neonate before or at the time of the procedures. Average nurse-patient ratio was also calculated. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.ResultsA documentation deficit of 2.2% was observed. The average nurse-patient ratio was 1.53:1. A total of 13711 procedures were recorded, yielding 44.1 (38.1 stressful, 3.8 mildly painful, and 2.2 moderately painful) procedures per patient day. Common stressful procedures were position changing (2501) and temperature recording (2208). Common mildly and moderately painful procedures were heel prick (757) and endotracheal suctioning (526), respectively. Use of pharmacological agents coincided with 33.48% of the procedures. The choice of drug and time of administration were inappropriate, indicating that the pharmacological agents were intended not for pain relief but rather for a coexisting pathology or as sedation from ventilation with no analgesia.ConclusionStressful procedures are common in the NICU; mildly and moderately painful procedures fairly common. Almost two-thirds of the times, no pharmaceutical pain relief methods were used, and when administered, the pharmaceutical agents were seldom intended for pain relief; this implies poor pain management practices and emphasizes the imperative need for educating NICU nurses, residents, fellows, and attendings.
| S-EPMC4763094 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe objective of the study was to compare nitrous oxide with oxygen (N2O/O2) to oral hydrocodone/acetaminophen and lorazepam for analgesia during first-trimester surgical abortion.Study designThis double-blind randomized trial assigned women undergoing first-trimester surgical abortion at<11 weeks' gestation to inhaled N2O/O2 vs. oral sedation for pain management. The N2O/O2 group received up to 70:30 ratio during the procedure and placebo pills preprocedure; the oral group received inhaled oxygen during the procedure and oral hydrocodone/acetaminophen 5 mg/325 mg and lorazepam 1 mg preprocedure. The primary outcome was maximum procedural pain, assessed on a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS; anchors 0=no pain and 100=worst pain) at 2 min postprocedure. A difference of 13 mm on the VAS was considered clinically significant. Satisfaction with pain management was measured on a 100-mm VAS (anchors 0=very unsatisfied, 100=very satisfied).ResultsWe randomized 140 women, 70 per study arm. Mean age of participants was 26±6.6 years; mean gestational age was 7.3±1.5 weeks. Mean maximum procedure pain scores were 52.5±26.7 and 60.8±24.4 for N2O/O2 and oral groups, respectively (p=.09). Satisfaction with pain management was 69.3±28.4 and 61.5±30.4 for N2O/O2 and oral groups. respectively (p=.15).ConclusionWe found no difference in mean procedural pain scores between women assigned to N2O/O2 vs. those assigned to oral sedation for first-trimester surgical abortion. Satisfaction with both options was high.ImplicationsWomen undergoing early surgical abortion experienced no differences in pain and satisfaction between those who used inhaled nitrous oxide and oral sedation. Nitrous oxide, with side effects limited to the duration of inhalation and no need for a ride home, is a viable alternative to oral sedation for first-trimester abortion pain management.
| S-EPMC5572215 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundManagement and monitoring of pain and sedation to reduce discomfort as well as side effects, such as over- and under-sedation, withdrawal syndrome and delirium, is an integral part of pediatric intensive care practice. However, the current state of management and monitoring of analgosedation across European pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) remains unknown. The aim of this survey was to describe current practices across European PICUs regarding the management and monitoring of pain and sedation.MethodsAn online survey was distributed among 357 European PICUs assessing demographic features, drug choices and dosing, as well as usage of instruments for monitoring pain and sedation. We also compared low- and high-volume PICUs practices. Responses were collected from January to April 2021.ResultsA total of 215 (60% response rate) PICUs from 27 European countries responded. Seventy-one percent of PICUs stated to use protocols for analgosedation management, more frequently in high-volume PICUs (77% vs 63%, p = 0.028). First-choice drug combination was an opioid with a benzodiazepine, namely fentanyl (51%) and midazolam (71%) being the preferred drugs. The starting doses differed between PICUs from 0.1 to 5 mcg/kg/h for fentanyl, and 0.01 to 0.5 mg/kg/h for midazolam. Daily assessment and documentation for pain (81%) and sedation (87%) was reported by most of the PICUs, using the preferred validated FLACC scale (54%) and the COMFORT Behavioural scale (48%), respectively. Both analgesia and sedation were mainly monitored by nurses (92% and 84%, respectively). Eighty-six percent of the responding PICUs stated to use neuromuscular blocking agents in some scenarios. Monitoring of paralysed patients was preferably done by observation of vital signs with electronic devices support.ConclusionsThis survey provides an overview of current analgosedation practices among European PICUs. Drugs of choice, dosing and assessment strategies were shown to differ widely. Further research and development of evidence-based guidelines for optimal drug dosing and analgosedation assessment are needed.
| S-EPMC8969245 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11251383 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Opioids are the most frequently used pain medications by US burn centers to control severe procedural pain during wound care. Concerns for long-term opioid use have prompted the exploration of non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as virtual reality (VR), for procedural pain management. The primary objective of this pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of VR pain alleviation treatment in reducing adult burn patients' perceived pain during burn dressing changes. Adult patients aged 18-70 years were recruited from the inpatient unit of a single American Burn Association-verified burn center between May 2019 and February 2020 and randomly assigned to one of three arms. Active VR participants played four VR games; passive VR participants were immersed in the same VR environment without the interaction elements; and a standard of care control group. 71 patients were screened for eligibility and 33 were deemed eligible to approach for informed consent, with 14 agreeing to participate in this study. Of these 14 patients, 4 were randomly assigned to the active VR, 4 to the passive VR, and 6 to the control group. Self-reported overall pain was lowest among participants in the active VR (dressing 1 = 41.3, dressing 2 = 61.0, and dressing 3 = 72.7) and highest among participants in the passive VR (dressing 1 = 58.3, dressing 2 = 74.5, and dressing 3 = 89.0) across all three dressing changes. Self-reported worst pain was lowest among the active VR at the first and last dressing (64.3 and 92.2, respectively), but the control group has the lowest self-reported worst pain at the second dressing (71.3). VR is a useful non-pharmacological tool for pain distraction but designing and implementing clinical research studies face many challenges in real-world medical settings. Lessons from this study have important implications for future VR studies by other researchers. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04545229.
| S-EPMC10519584 | biostudies-literature