ArticlePediatric quality & safety
Improving Documentation of Pain Reassessment after Pain Management Interventions in the NICU.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Best Evidence Summary for Perioperative Pain Management in Patients With Pectus Excavatum.Pain research & management · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Neonates exposed to painful procedures require pain assessment and reassessment using nonverbal scales. Nurses perform initial assessments routinely, but reassessment is variable. The goal was to increase pain reassessments in neonates with a previous score of 4 or higher within 60 minutes from 50% to 75% within 12 months. Methods: After identifying key drivers, we tested several interventions using the IHI's Model for Improvement. The outcome measure was the rate of reassessments within 1 hour after scoring ≥4 on the Neonatal Pain Agitation and Sedation Scale (N-PASS). Duration of time between scoring and intervention was documented. Interventions included electronic health record (EHR) changes, direct communication with bedside nurses through text messages and emails, in-person education, and a yearly competency module. The process measure was the number of messages/emails to staff. Sedation scores were the balancing measure. Results: Baseline compliance was 50% with significant variability. A centerline shift occurred after the first intervention. After the first four interventions in the following 3 months, a 29% total increase occurred. Overall time-lapse between reassessments decreased from 102 to 90 minutes. Overall sedation scores decreased from -2.5 during the baseline to -1.7 during the sustain period. The goal of 75% pain reassessments was achieved and sustained for two years. Conclusions: Automated tools such as the trigger report provided data that increased noncompliance visibility. Real-time and personalized reminders and education improved awareness and set the tone for culture change. Electronic health record reminders for reassessments and standardized annual education helped in sustaining change.
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.