Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
TERMINATED
NA
136 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2011-01-31
2012-04-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
To investigate the analgesic effect (measured with NIPS) of breastfeeding in addition to skin-to-skin contact versus other methods of non-pharmacological analgesia during blood sampling through heel lance in healthy term neonates. The influences of non-pharmacological methods on crying time, percentage of crying while sampling, heart rate, number of attempts and duration of sampling were studied.
Methods
Randomised controlled trial performed on 136 healthy term newborns in the maternity ward of a tertiary hospital. The inclusion criteria were: healthy term neonates, wish to breastfeed and absence of feeding during the previous 60 minutes. Neonates were randomly assigned to four groups: group 1, breastfed with skin-to-skin contact ; group 2, oral sucrose with skin-to-skin contact ; group 3, skin-to-skin contact ; or group 4, receiving oral sucrose Data for the primary objective was analysed per intention to treat. This study was approved by local ethical committee.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Non-pharmacological Analgesic Effects on Term Newborns
NCT03421158
Non-pharmacological Methods in Pain Managment During Heel Stick in Preterm Infants
NCT05281367
Breast Feeding Analgesia in Preterm Infants
NCT00175409
Two Methods of Analgesia for Chinese Term Infants Receiving Heel Lance
NCT01355640
Comparison of Different Methods for Reducing Pain in Heel Blood in Newborns
NCT05797532
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Painful stimuli in neonates may have short-term physiologic (increase in intracranial pressure, increase in heart rate or decrease in oxygen saturation) and behavioural consequences (cry, eye squeeze); as well as long-term consequences (altered of pain response in later infancy). Different non-pharmacological methods of analgesia, such as sucrose, skin-to-skin contact (SSC), breastfeeding(BF) or music10, have been used to reduce pain in neonates undergoing venipuncture or heel lancing, and different physiologic pathways to explain the underlying mechanism have been proposed.
A variety of valid and reliable pain assessment instruments have been developed over the past decades. Yet, behavioural pain assessment remains challenging and controversial due to the lack of a gold standard for neonatal pain expression. The Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS) and the Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) were selected by an international consensus neonatal pain group for acute procedural pain in neonates.
Our main objective was to investigate the analgesic effect (measured with NIPS) of breastfeeding in addition to SSC versus other methods of non-pharmacological analgesia during blood sampling through heel lance in healthy term neonates. Furthermore, the influences of non-pharmacological methods on crying time, percentage of crying while sampling, heart rate, number of attempts and time of sampling were studied.
METHODS
Protocol
This randomised controlled trial was performed on 136 healthy term newborns in the maternity ward of a tertiary hospital. The inclusion criteria were as follows: healthy term neonates (37-416 weeks of gestation) confirmed through a routine physical exam during the first 24h of life, wish to breastfeed and absence of feeding during the previous 60 minutes. Exclusion criteria were as follows: maternal use of opioids, birth in general anesthesia, artificial feeding, previous capillar or venous sampling, and previous admission to the neonatal unit.
Written informed consent was asked to parents during consultation. Study protocol and informed-consent forms were approved by the local ethics committee.
Intervention
Participating neonates were randomly assigned to four groups: group 1, breastfed with SSC (n=35); group 2, receiving oral sucrose with SSC (n=35); group 3, being held in SSC (n=33); or group 4, receiving oral sucrose (n=33). Randomisation was by closed envelopes and nurses and parents were masked to the randomization group but not blinded to the treatment assignment. In group 1 (BF+SSC), neonates dressed with a diaper were held in prone, in SSC with the mother; BF was started at least 5 minutes before heel lance and maintained during sampling. In group 2 (sucrose + SSC), neonates were held in prone between the mothers' breast at least 5 minutes before sampling and 2 ml 24% sucrose was given with a sterile syringe in the mouth 2 minutes before heel lance. In group 3 (SSC), neonates were held between the mother's breast as in group 2, but no sucrose was given. In group 4 (Sucrose), 2 ml 24% sucrose was administered through a sterile syringe in the mouth 2 minutes before heel lance to neonates laid on supine on a cot; the procedure was done in the presence of the mother. Mothers were allowed to speak or touch their babies in all the groups. The standardized procedure of heel prick in our hospital is such as described in group 4.
Throughout the duration of the test, babies were continuously recorded with a video camera at least 2 minutes before sampling and 2 minutes after the procedure. The heel was warmed up by a glove with lukewarm water at least 2 minutes before the sample. Heel lance was made with an automated piercing device for routine neonatal screening for congenital disorders at 48 hours of life. Heart rate was monitored by a pulse oximeter (Radical MasimoSet Datascope, Masimo Corporation, Irvine, CA) set on the infant's hand or foot. Hear rate was measured continuously but special attention was given to three time points: t0 (2 minutes before sampling); t1 (the highest value of the first 10 seconds after heel prick); and t2 (2 minutes after the procedure).
Blood sampling was performed through a standardized procedure by five experienced nurses, who obtained 5 dried spots of blood collected on a filter paper card. If the sample was not enough to complete all of the dried spots on the filter card, a new heel lance was practiced in few seconds. In this case, neonates were assessed for NIPS measure only after the first heel lance; secondary outcomes were evaluated during the whole sampling. Crying time was defined as the duration of crying while sampling. Percentage of crying was defined as the ratio between crying time while sampling and time of the procedure.
Pain scale
The NIPS scale is a validated 6-indicator scale for the assessment of acute pain in neonates11,13. It measure movement of arms and legs, breathing patterns, cry, facial expression and state of arousal. Score ranges from 0 (no pain) to 7 (severe pain). NIPS score \<4 means no pain-mild pain. NIPS score ≥4 means moderate-severe pain. NIPS score was measured at three time points: NIPS0 (2 minutes before sampling); NIPS1 (the highest value of the scale in the first 10 seconds after heel prick); and NIPS2 (2 minutes after the procedure). NIPS2 was not recorded if sampling had not finished at this time point. This took place in one newborn (2,8%) of group 1, five (14,2%), six (18.1%), and five (15.1%) of group 2, 3 and 4 respectively. NIPS was measured by three researchers who watched the videos: one expert neonatologist (Observer 1) and two young paediatricians (Observers 2 and 3). Coincidence was 90.8% (95% CI 87.8-93.8) between observers 1 and 2; 75% (70.5-79.5) between observers 1 and 3; and 78.7% (74.7-82.9) between observers 2 and 3. Consequently, only data of the expert neonatologist is shown.
Statistical Analysis
A sample size of 67 infants in each group was calculated to achieve a power of 80% with an α of 0.05 to detect a 0.5-point difference in the NIPS score (assuming SD=1). We decided to make a mid-point analysis when half of the neonates were recruited in order to detect if any of the analgesic methods was better than the standard procedure, and thus modify our clinical practice.
Results were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD). Categorical variables were analysed with the χ2 test and the Fisher test. We compared mean between groups with the t-test, ANOVA test and Bonferroni test. We used Mann-Whitney U test, non-parametric ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis to compare median between groups. The SPSS v.14.0 software package was used to perform all statistical analysis (SPSS Inc. IL, USA). A p-value of 0.05 was considered a statistically significant level of difference. The analysis of the main objective was conducted on an intention-to-treat. Secondary objectives were analysed according to protocol.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Breastfeeding + skin-to-skin contact
In group 1 (BF+SSC), neonates dressed with a diaper were held in prone, in SSC with the mother; breastfeeding (BF) was started at least 5 minutes before heel lance and maintained during sampling
Assess pain with the NIPS score
In group 1 (BF+SSC), neonates dressed with a diaper were held in prone, in SSC with the mother; BF was started at least 5 minutes before heel lance and maintained during sampling. In group 2 (sucrose + SSC), neonates were held in prone between the mothers' breast at least 5 minutes before sampling and 2 ml 24% sucrose was given with a sterile syringe in the mouth 2 minutes before heel lance. In group 3 (SSC), neonates were held between the mother's breast as in group 2, but no sucrose was given. In group 4 (Sucrose), 2 ml 24% sucrose was administered through a sterile syringe in the mouth 2 minutes before heel lance to neonates laid on supine on a cot; the procedure was done in the presence of the mother. Mothers were allowed to speak or touch their babies in all the groups.
Sucrose + skin-to-skin contact
In group 2 (sucrose + SSC), neonates were held in prone between the mothers' breast at least 5 minutes before sampling and 2 ml 24% sucrose was given with a sterile syringe in the mouth 2 minutes before heel lance.
Assess pain with the NIPS score
In group 1 (BF+SSC), neonates dressed with a diaper were held in prone, in SSC with the mother; BF was started at least 5 minutes before heel lance and maintained during sampling. In group 2 (sucrose + SSC), neonates were held in prone between the mothers' breast at least 5 minutes before sampling and 2 ml 24% sucrose was given with a sterile syringe in the mouth 2 minutes before heel lance. In group 3 (SSC), neonates were held between the mother's breast as in group 2, but no sucrose was given. In group 4 (Sucrose), 2 ml 24% sucrose was administered through a sterile syringe in the mouth 2 minutes before heel lance to neonates laid on supine on a cot; the procedure was done in the presence of the mother. Mothers were allowed to speak or touch their babies in all the groups.
Skin-to-skin contact
In group 3 (SSC), neonates were held between the mother's breast as in group 2, but no sucrose was given.
Assess pain with the NIPS score
In group 1 (BF+SSC), neonates dressed with a diaper were held in prone, in SSC with the mother; BF was started at least 5 minutes before heel lance and maintained during sampling. In group 2 (sucrose + SSC), neonates were held in prone between the mothers' breast at least 5 minutes before sampling and 2 ml 24% sucrose was given with a sterile syringe in the mouth 2 minutes before heel lance. In group 3 (SSC), neonates were held between the mother's breast as in group 2, but no sucrose was given. In group 4 (Sucrose), 2 ml 24% sucrose was administered through a sterile syringe in the mouth 2 minutes before heel lance to neonates laid on supine on a cot; the procedure was done in the presence of the mother. Mothers were allowed to speak or touch their babies in all the groups.
Sucrose
In group 4 (Sucrose), 2 ml 24% sucrose was administered through a sterile syringe in the mouth 2 minutes before heel lance to neonates laid on supine on a cot; the procedure was done in the presence of the mother
Assess pain with the NIPS score
In group 1 (BF+SSC), neonates dressed with a diaper were held in prone, in SSC with the mother; BF was started at least 5 minutes before heel lance and maintained during sampling. In group 2 (sucrose + SSC), neonates were held in prone between the mothers' breast at least 5 minutes before sampling and 2 ml 24% sucrose was given with a sterile syringe in the mouth 2 minutes before heel lance. In group 3 (SSC), neonates were held between the mother's breast as in group 2, but no sucrose was given. In group 4 (Sucrose), 2 ml 24% sucrose was administered through a sterile syringe in the mouth 2 minutes before heel lance to neonates laid on supine on a cot; the procedure was done in the presence of the mother. Mothers were allowed to speak or touch their babies in all the groups.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Assess pain with the NIPS score
In group 1 (BF+SSC), neonates dressed with a diaper were held in prone, in SSC with the mother; BF was started at least 5 minutes before heel lance and maintained during sampling. In group 2 (sucrose + SSC), neonates were held in prone between the mothers' breast at least 5 minutes before sampling and 2 ml 24% sucrose was given with a sterile syringe in the mouth 2 minutes before heel lance. In group 3 (SSC), neonates were held between the mother's breast as in group 2, but no sucrose was given. In group 4 (Sucrose), 2 ml 24% sucrose was administered through a sterile syringe in the mouth 2 minutes before heel lance to neonates laid on supine on a cot; the procedure was done in the presence of the mother. Mothers were allowed to speak or touch their babies in all the groups.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Wish to breastfeed
* Absence of feeding during the previous 60 minutes.
Exclusion Criteria
* Birth in general anesthesia.
* Artificial feeding.
* Previous capillar or venous sampling.
* Previous admission to the neonatal unit.
37 Weeks
41 Weeks
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Puerta de Hierro University Hospital
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Miguel Angel Marin Gabriel
Medical Doctor, Pediatrician, Principal Investigator.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Miguel A Marín Gabriel, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Deparment of Pediatrics. Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro-Majadahonda. Madrid. Spain
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro-Majadahonda
Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Porter FL, Wolf CM, Gold J, Lotsoff D, Miller JP. Pain and pain management in newborn infants: a survey of physicians and nurses. Pediatrics. 1997 Oct;100(4):626-32. doi: 10.1542/peds.100.4.626.
Perapoch Lopez J, Pallas Alonso CR, Linde Sillo MA, Moral Pumarega MT, Benito Castro F, Lopez Maestro M, Caserio Carbonero S, de la Cruz Bertolo J. [Developmental centered care. Evaluation of Spanish neonatal units]. An Pediatr (Barc). 2006 Feb;64(2):132-9. doi: 10.1157/13084172. Spanish.
Anand KJ. Clinical importance of pain and stress in preterm neonates. Biol Neonate. 1998;73(1):1-9. doi: 10.1159/000013953.
Mainous RO, Looney S. A pilot study of changes in cerebral blood flow velocity, resistance, and vital signs following a painful stimulus in the premature infant. Adv Neonatal Care. 2007 Apr;7(2):88-104. doi: 10.1097/01.anc.0000267914.96844.ce.
Lindh V, Wiklund U, Hakansson S. Heel lancing in term new-born infants: an evaluation of pain by frequency domain analysis of heart rate variability. Pain. 1999 Mar;80(1-2):143-8. doi: 10.1016/s0304-3959(98)00215-2.
Grunau RE, Holsti L, Peters JW. Long-term consequences of pain in human neonates. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2006 Aug;11(4):268-75. doi: 10.1016/j.siny.2006.02.007. Epub 2006 Apr 24.
Slater R, Cornelissen L, Fabrizi L, Patten D, Yoxen J, Worley A, Boyd S, Meek J, Fitzgerald M. Oral sucrose as an analgesic drug for procedural pain in newborn infants: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010 Oct 9;376(9748):1225-32. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61303-7.
Marin Gabriel MA, Lopez Escobar A, Galan Redondo M, Fernandez Moreno I, del Cerro Garcia R, Llana Martin I, de la Cruz Bertolo J, Lora Pablos D. [Evaluation of pain in a neonatal intensive care unit during endocrine-metabolic tests]. An Pediatr (Barc). 2008 Oct;69(4):316-21. doi: 10.1157/13126555. Spanish.
Bilgen H, Ozek E, Cebeci D, Ors R. Comparison of sucrose, expressed breast milk, and breast-feeding on the neonatal response to heel prick. J Pain. 2001 Oct;2(5):301-5. doi: 10.1054/jpai.2001.23140.
Hartling L, Shaik MS, Tjosvold L, Leicht R, Liang Y, Kumar M. Music for medical indications in the neonatal period: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2009 Sep;94(5):F349-54. doi: 10.1136/adc.2008.148411. Epub 2009 May 28.
Lawrence J, Alcock D, McGrath P, Kay J, MacMurray SB, Dulberg C. The development of a tool to assess neonatal pain. Neonatal Netw. 1993 Sep;12(6):59-66.
Stevens B, Johnston C, Petryshen P, Taddio A. Premature Infant Pain Profile: development and initial validation. Clin J Pain. 1996 Mar;12(1):13-22. doi: 10.1097/00002508-199603000-00004.
Anand KJ; International Evidence-Based Group for Neonatal Pain. Consensus statement for the prevention and management of pain in the newborn. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2001 Feb;155(2):173-80. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.155.2.173.
Overgaard C, Knudsen A. Pain-relieving effect of sucrose in newborns during heel prick. Biol Neonate. 1999 May;75(5):279-84. doi: 10.1159/000014105.
Leslie A, Marlow N. Non-pharmacological pain relief. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2006 Aug;11(4):246-50. doi: 10.1016/j.siny.2006.02.005. Epub 2006 Apr 24.
Bellieni CV, Bagnoli F, Perrone S, Nenci A, Cordelli DM, Fusi M, Ceccarelli S, Buonocore G. Effect of multisensory stimulation on analgesia in term neonates: a randomized controlled trial. Pediatr Res. 2002 Apr;51(4):460-3. doi: 10.1203/00006450-200204000-00010.
Gibbins S, Stevens B. Mechanisms of sucrose and non-nutritive sucking in procedural pain management in infants. Pain Res Manag. 2001 Spring;6(1):21-8. doi: 10.1155/2001/376819.
Gradin M, Schollin J. The role of endogenous opioids in mediating pain reduction by orally administered glucose among newborns. Pediatrics. 2005 Apr;115(4):1004-7. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-1189.
Gray L, Miller LW, Philipp BL, Blass EM. Breastfeeding is analgesic in healthy newborns. Pediatrics. 2002 Apr;109(4):590-3. doi: 10.1542/peds.109.4.590.
Codipietro L, Ceccarelli M, Ponzone A. Breastfeeding or oral sucrose solution in term neonates receiving heel lance: a randomized, controlled trial. Pediatrics. 2008 Sep;122(3):e716-21. doi: 10.1542/peds.2008-0221.
Carbajal R, Veerapen S, Couderc S, Jugie M, Ville Y. Analgesic effect of breast feeding in term neonates: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2003 Jan 4;326(7379):13. doi: 10.1136/bmj.326.7379.13.
Upadhyay A, Aggarwal R, Narayan S, Joshi M, Paul VK, Deorari AK. Analgesic effect of expressed breast milk in procedural pain in term neonates: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. Acta Paediatr. 2004 Apr;93(4):518-22. doi: 10.1080/08035250410022792.
Castral TC, Warnock F, Leite AM, Haas VJ, Scochi CG. The effects of skin-to-skin contact during acute pain in preterm newborns. Eur J Pain. 2008 May;12(4):464-71. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2007.07.012. Epub 2007 Sep 14.
Johnston CC, Stevens B, Pinelli J, Gibbins S, Filion F, Jack A, Steele S, Boyer K, Veilleux A. Kangaroo care is effective in diminishing pain response in preterm neonates. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003 Nov;157(11):1084-8. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.157.11.1084.
Gray L, Watt L, Blass EM. Skin-to-skin contact is analgesic in healthy newborns. Pediatrics. 2000 Jan;105(1):e14. doi: 10.1542/peds.105.1.e14.
Okan F, Ozdil A, Bulbul A, Yapici Z, Nuhoglu A. Analgesic effects of skin-to-skin contact and breastfeeding in procedural pain in healthy term neonates. Ann Trop Paediatr. 2010;30(2):119-28. doi: 10.1179/146532810X12703902516121.
Ludington-Hoe SM, Swinth JY. Developmental aspects of kangaroo care. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 1996 Oct;25(8):691-703. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.1996.tb01483.x.
Weller A, Feldman R. Emotion regulation and touch in infants: the role of cholecystokinin and opioids. Peptides. 2003 May;24(5):779-88. doi: 10.1016/s0196-9781(03)00118-9.
Weller A, Blass EM. Behavioral evidence for cholecystokinin-opiate interactions in neonatal rats. Am J Physiol. 1988 Dec;255(6 Pt 2):R901-7. doi: 10.1152/ajpregu.1988.255.6.R901.
Blass EM. Behavioral and physiological consequences of suckling in rat and human newborns. Acta Paediatr Suppl. 1994 Jun;397:71-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.1994.tb13268.x.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
260 271110
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.