Dataset Information

Analgesic efficacy and safety of morphine in the Procedural Pain in Premature Infants (Poppi) study: randomised placebo-controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Infant pain has immediate and long-term effects but is undertreated because of a paucity of evidence-based analgesics. Although morphine is often used to sedate ventilated infants, its analgesic efficacy is unclear. We aimed to establish whether oral morphine could provide effective and safe analgesia in non-ventilated premature infants for acute procedural pain.

Methods

In this single-centre masked trial, 31 infants at the John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK, were randomly allocated using a web-based facility with a minimisation algorithm to either 100 μg/kg oral morphine sulphate or placebo 1 h before a clinically required heel lance and retinopathy of prematurity screening examination, on the same occasion. Eligible infants were born prematurely at less than 32 weeks' gestation or with a birthweight lower than 1501 g and had a gestational age of 34-42 weeks at the time of the study. The co-primary outcome measures were the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R) score after retinopathy of prematurity screening and the magnitude of noxious-evoked brain activity after heel lancing. Secondary outcome measures assessed physiological stability and safety. This trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database (number 2014-003237-25).

Findings

Between Oct 30, 2016, and Nov 17, 2017, 15 infants were randomly allocated to morphine and 16 to placebo; one infant assigned placebo was withdrawn from the study before monitoring began. The predefined stopping boundary was crossed, and trial recruitment stopped because of profound respiratory adverse effects of morphine without suggestion of analgesic efficacy. None of the co-primary outcome measures differed significantly between groups. PIPP-R score after retinopathy of prematurity screening was mean 11·1 (SD 3·2) with morphine and 10·5 (3·4) with placebo (mean difference 0·5, 95% CI -2·0 to 3·0; p=0·66). Noxious-evoked brain activity after heel lancing was median 0·99 (IQR 0·40-1·56) with morphine and 0·75 (0·33-1·22) with placebo (median difference 0·25, 95% CI -0·16 to 0·80; p=0·25).

Interpretation

Administration of oral morphine (100 μg/kg) to non-ventilated premature infants has the potential for harm without analgesic efficacy. We do not recommend oral morphine for retinopathy of prematurity screening and strongly advise caution if considering its use for other acute painful procedures in non-ventilated premature infants.

Funding

Wellcome Trust and National Institute for Health Research.

SUBMITTER: Hartley C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6294828 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:In spite of advances in understanding and technology, postoperative pain remains poorly treated for a significant number of patients. In colorectal surgery, the need for developing novel analgesics is especially important. Patients after bowel surgery are assessed for rapid return of bowel function and opioids worsen ileus, nausea and constipation. We describe a prospective, double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial testing the hypothesis that a novel analgesic drug, VVZ -149, is safe and effective in improving pain compared with providing opioid analgesia alone among adults undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Based on sample size calculations for primary outcome, we plan to enrol 120 participants. Adult patients without significant medical comorbidities or ongoing opioid use and who are undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery will be enrolled. Participants are randomly assigned to receive either VVZ-149 with intravenous (IV) hydromorphone patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) or the control intervention (IV PCA alone) in the postoperative period. The primary outcome is the Sum of Pain Intensity Difference over 8?hours (SPID-8 postdose). Participants receive VVZ-149 for 8?hours postoperatively to the primary study end point, after which they continue to be assessed for up to 24?hours. We measure opioid consumption, record pain intensity and pain relief, and evaluate the number of rescue doses and requests for opioid. To assess safety, we record sedation, nausea and vomiting, respiratory depression, laboratory tests and ECG readings after study drug administration. We evaluate for possible confounders of analgesic response, such as anxiety, depression and catastrophising behaviours. The study will also collect blood sample data and evaluate for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic relationships. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethical approval of the study protocol has been obtained from Institutional Review Boards at the participating institutions. Trial results will be disseminated through scientific conference presentations and by publication in scientific journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02489526; pre-results.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To examine the analgesic efficacy and safety of ketamine after total knee or hip arthroplasty. DESIGN:Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES:PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library from inception to 22 May 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES:Randomised controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of ketamine with placebo for postoperative pain relief in patients undergoing total knee or hip arthroplasty. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Data (ie, pain intensity, morphine consumption, gastrointestinal and psychotic adverse effects) were extracted by two reviewers independently. The Cochrane Collaboration's recommended tool was used to determine the methodological quality of included studies. RESULTS:A total of 10 studies were included. One of them was rated as low quality. Compared with placebo, intravenous ketamine was effective for pain relief during 0-8-hour (weighted mean difference (WMD) -1.21, 95%?CI -1.45 to -0.98, p<0.001; three studies, 149 participants) but not during 8-24-hour postoperative periods, and effective for reduction of cumulative morphine consumption during both 0-24-hour (WMD -17.76, 95%?CI -31.25 to -4.27, p=0.01; five studies, 366 participants) and 0-48-hour (WMD -21.79, 95%?CI -25.46 to -18.11, p<0.001; four studies, 252 participants) postoperative periods, without increasing risks of gastrointestinal or psychotic adverse effects. The limited data available for intra-articular (WMD -0.49, 95%?CI -0.70 to -0.29, p<0.001; two studies, 83 participants) and epidural (WMD -2.10, 95%?CI -3.30 to -0.90, p<0.001; one study, 20 participants) ketamine pointed to a significant reduction in pain intensity during 8-24-hour postoperative period. CONCLUSIONS:Intravenous administration of ketamine is effective and safe for postoperative pain relief in patients undergoing total knee or hip arthroplasty. Nevertheless, the analgesic efficacy and safety of ketamine in such patients seem to vary by different administration routes and still warrant further studies to explore.

Project description:BackgroundChronic pain and depression often co-occur, and pain may exacerbate depression in people with dementia.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of analgesic treatment for depression in nursing home patients with advanced dementia and clinically significant depressive symptoms.MethodsWe conducted a multicentre, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 47 nursing homes, including 162 nursing home patients aged ≥ 60 years with dementia (Mini-Mental State Examination ≤ 20) and depression (Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia ≥ 8). Patients were randomised to receive active analgesic treatment (paracetamol or buprenorphine transdermal system) or identical placebo for 13 weeks. The main outcome measure was the change in depression (Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia) from baseline to 13 weeks, assessed using linear mixed models with fixed effects for time, intervention and their interaction in the models. Secondary outcomes were to assess whether any change in depression was secondary to change in pain (Mobilisation-Observation-Behaviour-Intensity-Dementia-2 Pain Scale) and adverse events.ResultsThe mean depression change was - 0.66 (95% confidence interval - 2.27 to 0.94) in the active group (n = 80) and - 3.30 (- 4.68 to -1.92) in the placebo group (n = 82). The estimated treatment effect was 2.64 (0.55-4.72, p = 0.013), indicating that analgesic treatment had no effect on depressive symptoms from baseline to 13 weeks while placebo appeared to ameliorate depressive symptoms. There was no significant reduction in pain in the active treatment group (paracetamol and buprenorphine combined) vs. placebo; however, a subgroup analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in pain for paracetamol vs. placebo [by - 1.11 (- 2.16 to - 0.06, p = 0.037)] from week 6 to 13 without a change in depression. Buprenorphine did not have significant effects on depression [3.04 (- 0.11 to 6.19), p = 0.059] or pain [0.47 (- 0.77 to 1.71), p = 0.456] from 0 to 13 weeks. Thirty-five patients were withdrawn from the study because of adverse reactions, deterioration or death: 25 (31.3%) during active treatment [23 (52.3%) who received buprenorphine], and ten (12.2%) in the placebo group. The most frequently occurring adverse events were psychiatric (17 adverse reactions) and neurological (14 adverse reactions).ConclusionAnalgesic treatment did not reduce depression while placebo appeared to improve depressive symptoms significantly by comparison, possibly owing to the adverse effects of active buprenorphine. The risk of adverse events warrants caution when prescribing buprenorphine for people with advanced dementia.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02267057 (registered 7 July, 2014) and Norwegian Medicines Agency EudraCT 2013-002226-23.

Project description:BackgroundContinuous intravenous (IV) morphine is commonly used in ventilated neonates. Oral route is theoretically feasible but data on oral morphine in ventilated premature infants are lacking.ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy, efficiency, and tolerability of a continuous intravenous to oral morphine switch protocol.DesignRetrospective study.SettingSingle level III center's neonatal intensive care unit.PatientsVentilated premature infants hospitalized in the NICU in 2016 and 2017, receiving continuous IV morphine with an expected ventilation course of at least 72 more hours. We excluded patients treated for withdrawal syndrome or palliative care.InterventionsContinuous IV to oral morphine switch with the same initial cumulated daily dose.Main outcome measuresPain scores (ComfortNeo scale) and morphine doses were analyzed over time using Friedman's test in the 24 hours preceding and the 48 hours following the oral switch. Adverse effects attributable to opioids were collected.ResultsSeventeen infants were included with a median [IQR] gestational age at birth of 25.9 [24.6-26.9] weeks and a median postnatal age at oral switch of 30 [22-36] days. One patient's intravenous treatment had to be resumed because of a high ComfortNeo score. All others remained on oral morphine. No significant change over time was observed for ComfortNeo scores (P = .15). Median [IQR] doses were 13.5 [10-20] µg/kg/h in the IV period and significantly increased to 15 [10-25] µg/kg/h in the oral period (P = .009). No short-term respiratory, digestive, or urinary adverse event was observed. After a median [IQR] duration of 13 [4-20] days of oral morphine treatment, 11 (65%) patients showed signs of withdrawal. Upon hospital discharge, 16 infants (94%) had bronchopulmonary dysplasia and none had severe cerebral abnormality on brain imaging.ConclusionOral morphine might be useful in ventilated neonates in the NICU but deserves further studies and additional safety assessment.

Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy and safety of paracetamol (acetaminophen) in the management of spinal pain and osteoarthritis of the hip or knee.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, Web of Science, LILACS, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to December 2014.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRandomised controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of paracetamol with placebo for spinal pain (neck or low back pain) and osteoarthritis of the hip or knee.Data extractionTwo independent reviewers extracted data on pain, disability, and quality of life. Secondary outcomes were adverse effects, patient adherence, and use of rescue medication. Pain and disability scores were converted to a scale of 0 (no pain or disability) to 100 (worst possible pain or disability). We calculated weighted mean differences or risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals using a random effects model. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used for assessing risk of bias, and the GRADE approach was used to evaluate the quality of evidence and summarise conclusions.Results12 reports (13 randomised trials) were included. There was "high quality" evidence that paracetamol is ineffective for reducing pain intensity (weighted mean difference -0.5, 95% confidence interval -2.9 to 1.9) and disability (0.4, -1.7 to 2.5) or improving quality of life (0.4, -0.9 to 1.7) in the short term in people with low back pain. For hip or knee osteoarthritis there was "high quality" evidence that paracetamol provides a significant, although not clinically important, effect on pain (-3.7, -5.5 to -1.9) and disability (-2.9, -4.9 to -0.9) in the short term. The number of patients reporting any adverse event (risk ratio 1.0, 95% confidence interval 0.9 to 1.1), any serious adverse event (1.2, 0.7 to 2.1), or withdrawn from the study because of adverse events (1.2, 0.9 to 1.5) was similar in the paracetamol and placebo groups. Patient adherence to treatment (1.0, 0.9 to 1.1) and use of rescue medication (0.7, 0.4 to 1.3) was also similar between groups. "High quality" evidence showed that patients taking paracetamol are nearly four times more likely to have abnormal results on liver function tests (3.8, 1.9 to 7.4), but the clinical importance of this effect is uncertain.ConclusionsParacetamol is ineffective in the treatment of low back pain and provides minimal short term benefit for people with osteoarthritis. These results support the reconsideration of recommendations to use paracetamol for patients with low back pain and osteoarthritis of the hip or knee in clinical practice guidelines.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO registration number CRD42013006367.

Project description:BackgroundBCG vaccination provides incomplete protection against tuberculosis in infants. A new vaccine, modified Vaccinia Ankara virus expressing antigen 85A (MVA85A), was designed to enhance the protective efficacy of BCG. We aimed to assess safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of MVA85A against tuberculosis and Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection in infants.MethodsIn our double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 2b trial, we enrolled healthy infants (aged 4–6 months) without HIV infection who had previously received BCG vaccination. We randomly allocated infants (1:1), according to an independently generated sequence with block sizes of four, to receive one intradermal dose of MVA85A or an equal volume of Candida skin test antigen as placebo at a clinical facility in a rural region near Cape Town, South Africa. We actively followed up infants every 3 months for up to 37 months. The primary study outcome was safety (incidence of adverse and serious adverse events) in all vaccinated participants, but we also assessed efficacy in a protocol-defined group of participants who received at least one dose of allocated vaccine. The primary efficacy endpoint was incident tuberculosis incorporating microbiological, radiological, and clinical criteria, and the secondary efficacy endpoint was M tuberculosis infection according to QuantiFERON TB Gold In-tube conversion (Cellestis, Australia). This trial was registered with the South African National Clinical Trials Register (DOH-27-0109-2654) and with ClinicalTrials.gov on July 31, 2009, number NCT00953927.FindingsBetween July 15, 2009, and May 4, 2011, we enrolled 2797 infants (1399 allocated MVA85A and 1398 allocated placebo). Median follow-up in the per-protocol population was 24·6 months (IQR 19·2–28·1), and did not differ between groups. More infants who received MVA85A than controls had at least one local adverse event (1251 [89%] of 1399 MVA85A recipients and 628 [45%] of 1396 controls who received the allocated intervention) but the numbers of infants with systemic adverse events (1120 [80%] and 1059 [76%]) or serious adverse events (257 [18%] and 258 (18%) did not differ between groups. None of the 648 serious adverse events in these 515 infants was related to MVA85A. 32 (2%) of 1399 MVA85A recipients met the primary efficacy endpoint (tuberculosis incidence of 1·15 per 100 person-years [95% CI 0·79 to 1·62]; with conversion in 178 [13%] of 1398 infants [95% CI 11·0 to 14·6]) as did 39 (3%) of 1395 controls (1·39 per 100 person-years [1·00 to 1·91]; with conversion in 171 [12%] of 1394 infants [10·6 to 14·1]). Efficacy against tuberculosis was 17·3% (95% CI −31·9 to 48·2) and against M tuberculosis infection was −3·8% (–28·1 to 15·9).InterpretationMVA85A was well tolerated and induced modest cell-mediated immune responses. Reasons for the absence of MVA85A efficacy against tuberculosis or M tuberculosis infection in infants need exploration.FundingAeras, Wellcome Trust, and Oxford-Emergent Tuberculosis Consortium (OETC).