Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26583940›Full record

Trial reportJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2016

To evaluate and compare the efficacy of combined sucrose and non-nutritive sucking for analgesia in newborns undergoing minor painful procedure: a randomized controlled trial.

P Thakkar, K Arora, K Goyal, R R Das, B Javadekar, S Aiyer, S K Panigrahi

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Sucrose analgesia for heel-lance procedures in neonates.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Non-pharmacological management of infant and young child procedural pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Effect of Non-Pharmacological Methods in the Reduction of Neonatal Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Sucrose for analgesia in newborn infants undergoing painful procedures.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. New perspective for pain control in neonates: a comparative effectiveness research.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021
    Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. [Expert consensus on neonatal pain assessment and analgesia management (2020 edition)].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

P ThakkarDepartment of Paediatrics, Government Medical College and Hospital, Vadodara, India.
K AroraDivision of Neonatology, Department of Paediatrics, Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana, India.
K GoyalDepartment of Paediatrics, Government Medical College and Hospital, Vadodara, India.
R R DasDepartment of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Bhubaneswar, India.
B JavadekarDepartment of Paediatrics, Government Medical College and Hospital, Vadodara, India.
S AiyerDepartment of Paediatrics, Government Medical College and Hospital, Vadodara, India.
S K PanigrahiDepartment of Community Medicine, IMS and SUM Hospital, Bhubaneswar, India.
Government Medical College and Hospital · INAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar · INDayanand Medical College & Hospital · INInstitute of Medical Sciences and Sum Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of combined sucrose and non-nutritive sucking (NNS) for analgesia in newborn infants undergoing heel-stick procedures. STUDY

designThis randomized control trial was conducted in the neonatal intensive care unit of a tertiary care hospital over a period of 1 year. One hundred and eighty full-term neonates with birth weight >2200 g and age >24 h were randomized to one of four interventions administered 2 min before the procedure: 2 ml of 30% sucrose (group I, n=45) or NNS (group II, n=45) or both (group III, n=45) or none (group IV, n=45). Primary outcome was composite score based on Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) score.

resultBaseline variables were comparable among the groups. Median (interquartile range) PIPP score was 3 (2 to 4) in group III as compared with 7 (6.5 to 8) in group I, 9 (7 to 11) in group II and 13 (10.5 to 15) in group IV. Group III had significant decrease in the median PIPP score compared with other groups (P=0.000). Median PIPP score also decreased significantly with any intervention as compared with no intervention (P=0.000).

conclusionSucrose and/or NNS are effective in providing analgesia in full-term neonates undergoing heel-stick procedures, with the combined intervention being more effective compared with any single intervention.

Indexed as

Blood Specimen CollectionAnalgesiaFemaleHumansIndiaInfant, NewbornIntensive Care Units, NeonatalMaleNon-Nutritive SweetenersPainPain ManagementPain MeasurementSucking BehaviorSucroseTerm BirthTertiary Care CentersNon-Nutritive SweetenersSucrose

Identifiers

PMID26583940
OpenAlexW2177242319

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.