Search

Copyright of Journal of Advanced Nursing (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.) is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article presents Midwest Nursing Research Society (MNRS) News which include excerpts from My Research Journey Started Early by authors including Rita H. Pickler, and recipient of the 2020 MNRS being distinguished contribution award.

Background: Infants in the neonatal intensive care unit experience aversive stimuli that cause pain and distress. Maintaining adequate relief from pain and distress is challenging because of infants' varying ages and stages of development and their nonverbal status. Thus, pain and distress must be interpreted by a healthcare provider or other proxy from their own observations or perceptions. There is no standard research or clinical measure for pain and distress in infants. Objective: The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the use of the COMFORT Behavior (COMFORT-B) Scale as a measure of pain and distress in infants diagnosed with life-threatening or life-limiting illnesses in the neonatal intensive care unit in comparison with the nurse-documented Neonatal Pain, Agitation and Sedation Scale; the infants' Technology Dependence Scale; and the mothers' report of total perceived symptom scores. Methods: Infants diagnosed with life-threatening or life-limiting illnesses and hospitalized in a Level IV neonatal intensive care unit in the Midwestern United States and their parents were included. Measurement of pain and distress in infants was collected weekly from enrollment through 12 weeks or until discharge, whichever occurred first. Observations for the COMFORT-B Scale were conducted before and after standard caregiving activities. Pearson r correlations were used to compare means between pain and distress, technology dependence, and mothers' total perceived symptom scores over time. Results: Data from 78 infants (46 male and 32 female infants) of ages 23-41 weeks of gestation at birth were analyzed. No correlations were found among the COMFORT-B Scale; the Neonatal Pain, Agitation and Sedation Scale; and mothers' total perceived symptom scores. Moderate correlations were found among the Technology Dependence Scale; mothers' total perceived symptom scores; and the Neonatal Pain, Agitation and Sedation Scale. Discussion: Performing COMFORT-B observations can be challenging, and it is unclear whether the information obtained from the COMFORT-B Scale added to the assessment of the infant's pain and distress that is typically recorded in the health record or from parents. Further evaluation is needed to determine if it is more reliable to collect the Neonatal Pain, Agitation and Sedation Scale scores rather than conduct observations using the COMFORT-B Scale in studies of infants with life-threatening and life-limiting illnesses in the neonatal intensive care unit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Extended hospitalization in neonatal intensive care units subjects preterm infants to multiple stress exposures that affect long-term cognitive functioning, motor development, and stress reactivity. Measurement of stress exposure is challenging with multiple measures of stress exposure in use, including counts of skin-breaking or invasive procedures or counts of noxious sensory exposures. Objectives: The purpose of this analysis was to compare measures of stress exposure commonly used by researchers and to determine the predictive validity of these measures for early neurobehavior. We accomplished this objective through the following specific aims: (a) describe the stress exposures of preterm infants in the first 2 weeks of life, (b) determine the correlations among measures of stress exposure, and (c) compare the predictive validity of measures of stress exposure for early neurobehavior. Methods: Very preterm infants born between 28 and 31 weeks postmenstrual age were enrolled from four neonatal intensive care units in a large Midwest city. We measured stress exposure over the first 14 days of life for each infant as a count of skin-breaking procedures, a count of invasive procedures, and cumulative scores derived from the Neonatal Infant Stressor Scale. Neurobehavior was assessed at 35 weeks postmenstrual age using the motor development and vigor and alertness/orientation subscales from the Neurobehavioral Assessment of the Preterm Infant. We used Spearman's rho to determine correlations among the measures of stress exposure and multiple linear regression to determine the predictive validity of each stress exposure measure for neurobehavioral outcomes. Results: Seventy-one preterm infants were included in the analysis. We found marked variance across individuals in all measures of stress exposure. There were moderate–high correlations among the measures of stress exposure. No measure of stress exposure was associated with early neurobehavior. Discussion: The stress experiences of hospitalized preterm infants vary. This variance is reflected in all measures of stress exposure. Because measures of stress exposure are highly correlated, the most objective measure requiring the least interpretation should be used. However, the currently available measures of stress exposure used in this analysis may not reflect the infant's physiological stress responses and fail to associate with early neurobehavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]