Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34300223›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021

Pre-Hospital Pain Management in Children with Injuries: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Ada Holak, Michał Czapla, Marzena Zielińska

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

3 authors.

Ada HolakDepartment of Emergency Medicine, College of Rehabilitation, 01-234 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-5850-3186
Michał CzaplaFaculty of Health Sciences, Wroclaw Medical University, 51-618 Wrocław, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-4245-5420
Marzena ZielińskaDepartment and Clinic of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Therapy, Faculty of Medicine, Wroclaw Medical University, 50-556 Wrocław, Poland.

Funding

Ministerstwo Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego SUB.E140.21.108
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe all-too-frequent failure to rate pain intensity, resulting in the lack of or inadequacy of pain management, has long ceased to be an exclusive problem of the young patient, becoming a major public health concern. This study aimed to evaluate the methods used for reducing post-traumatic pain in children and the frequency of use of such methods. Additionally, the methods of pain assessment and the frequency of their application in this age group were analysed.

methodsA retrospective analysis of 2452 medical records of emergency medical teams dispatched to injured children aged 0-18 years in the area around Warsaw (Poland).

resultsOf all injured children, 1% (20 out of 2432) had their pain intensity rated, and the only tool used for this assessment was the numeric rating scale (NRS). Children with burns most frequently received a single analgesic drug or cooling (56.2%), whereas the least frequently used method was multimodal treatment combining pharmacotherapy and cooling (13.5%). Toddlers constituted the largest percentage of patients who were provided with cooling (12%). Immobilisation was most commonly used in adolescents (29%) and school-age children (

conclusionsLow frequency of pain assessment emphasises the need to provide better training in the use of various pain rating scales and protocols. What is more, non-pharmacological methods (cooling and immobilisation) used for reducing pain in injured children still remain underutilized.

Indexed as

acute painemergency medical servicesinjurypaediatric painpain rating scalepain scorepre-hospital opioid analgesia

Identifiers

PMID34300223
PMCPMC8307009

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.