Trial reportPloS one2015
A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Use of Oral Glucose with or without Gentle Facilitated Tucking of Infants during Neonatal Echocardiography.
Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01253889 (Glucose 25% and Facilitated Tucking for Reducing Procedural Stress During Neonatologist-performed Cardiac Echocardiography in Infants in the NICU), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Glucose 25% and Facilitated Tucking for Reducing Procedural Stress During Neonatologist-performed Cardiac Echocardiography in Infants in the NICU
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-pharmacological management of infant and young child procedural pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Gentle Touch and Sucrose for Pain Relief during Suctioning in Preterm Newborns-A Randomized Clinical Trial.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the effect of oral glucose given with or without facilitated tucking (FT), versus placebo (water) to facilitate image acquisition during a targeted neonatal echocardiography (TNE).
designFactorial, double blind, randomized controlled trial.
settingTertiary neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). PATIENTS: Infants born between 26 and 42 weeks of gestation (GA).
interventionsOne of four treatment groups: oral water (placebo), oral glucose (25%), facilitated tucking with oral water or facilitated tucking with oral glucose, during a single, structured TNE. All infants received a soother.
main outcome measureChange in Behavioral Indicators of Infant Pain (BIIP) scores.
results104 preterm infants were randomized (mean ± SD GA: 33.4 ± 3.5 weeks). BIIP scores remained low during the echocardiography scan (median, [IQ range]: 0, [0 to 1]). There were no differences in the level of agitation of infants amongst the treatment groups, with estimated reductions in mean BIIP relative to control of 0.27 (95%CI -0.40 to 0.94) with use of oral glucose and .04 (-0.63 to 0.70) with facilitated tucking. There were also no differences between treatment groups in the quality and duration of the echocardiography scans.
conclusionsIn stable infants in the NICU, a TNE can be performed with minimal disruption in a majority of cases, simply by providing a soother. The use of 25% glucose water in this context did not provide further benefit in reducing agitation and improving image acquisition. CLINICAL
trial registrationClinical Trials.gov: NCT01253889.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.