Search

Oral sucrose is included in almost all recommendations for treatment of pain in newborns, but evidence if multiple doses might be more effective than a single standard dose is lacking. We designed a single-centre, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial. We enrolled preterm infants needing the heel prick procedure. Each enrolled infant was randomised to receive a single standard dose of sucrose 2 min before or a double dose of sucrose 2 min before, and 30 s after heel prick. Primary outcome was the efficacy of the two interventions tested by the premature infant pain profile-PIPP scale obtained at 30 s, 60 s, and 120 s after heel prick. Secondary outcome was the evaluation of the concordance between the PIPP scale and other pain scores more feasible in clinical practice. Seventy-two infants were randomised. No difference in pain perception as measured by the PIPP scale was found between the groups: median PIPP values 4.0(IQR 3.0-4.0) vs 3.0(IQR 3.0-4.0) at baseline; 6.0(IQR 5.0-10.0) vs 6.0(IQR 4.0-8.5) at 30 s; 6.0(IQR 4.0-7.0) vs 5.0(IQR 4.0-8.5) at 60 s and 5.0(IQR 4.0-7.0) vs 5.0(IQR 4.0-7.5) at 2 min, in the experimental and standard treatment groups, respectively (p = 0.9020). There was no correlation between PIPP scores and other pain scales.Conclusion: We do not recommend doubling the dose during heel prick.What is Known:• Oral sucrose is included in almost all international position papers and recommendations for the treatment of mild to moderate pain in newborns, associated with non-nutritive sucking and facilitated tucking• Premature infant pain profile (PIPP) scale is the gold standard for evaluation of pain in preterms but it is difficult to use in clinical practiceWhat is New:• Repeating a dose of 24% sucrose is not effective in reducing pain during the recovery phase of a skin breaking procedure• Other pain scales, easier to use in clinical practice, are not comparable with PIPP for the evaluation of procedural pain in preterms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Authors Chang Liu B.S and Yuan Shi commented our paper on Fluid restriction in management of patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) in Italy. With our study, we conducted a prospective cross-sectional survey among all Italian Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICUs) to address conservative management of patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) in preterm infants below 29 weeks' gestational age (GA), with specific regard to fluid restriction (FR). The Authors wondered if the heterogeneity of use of fluid restriction both as a prophylactic tool and as a conservative tool when a hemodynamically significant PDA is diagnosed, was due to economic disparities among areas of the included centers. Conducting a secondary analysis of our data, we observed that if we separately consider the responses of two areas, northern and central-southern Italy, FR is slightly more frequently applied in Central and Southern regions (82%) as compared to Northern regions (78%), although this finding does not reach statistical significance. No correlation between the likelihood to adopt conservative measures and the amount of allowed fluid intake was found. The hypothesis that "less fluid intake resulted in milder clinical and echocardiographic presentations of PDA, and thus a lower rate of pharmacological treatment" cannot be supported by our current study design and might deserve future investigations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]