Cargando…

Pain assessment tools for use in infants: a meta-review

BACKGROUND: Identifying pain in infants is challenging due to their inability to self-report pain, therefore the availability of valid and reliable means of assessing pain is critical. OBJECTIVE: This meta-review sought to identify evidence that could guide the selection of appropriate tools in this...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Arabiat, Diana, Mörelius, Evalotte, Hoti, Kreshnik, Hughes, Jeffery
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10278280/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37337167
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12887-023-04099-7
_version_ 1785060449841053696
author Arabiat, Diana
Mörelius, Evalotte
Hoti, Kreshnik
Hughes, Jeffery
author_facet Arabiat, Diana
Mörelius, Evalotte
Hoti, Kreshnik
Hughes, Jeffery
author_sort Arabiat, Diana
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Identifying pain in infants is challenging due to their inability to self-report pain, therefore the availability of valid and reliable means of assessing pain is critical. OBJECTIVE: This meta-review sought to identify evidence that could guide the selection of appropriate tools in this vulnerable population. METHODS: We searched Scopus, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, MIDRIS, EMCare and Google Scholar for eligible systematic reviews. Eligible reviews documented psychometric properties of available observational tools used to assess pain in infants. RESULTS: A total of 516 reviews were identified of which 11 met our inclusion criteria. We identified 36 pain assessment tools (evaluated in 11 reviews) of which seven were reported in at least three reviews. The level of evidence reported on the psychometric properties of pain assessment tools varied widely ranging from low to good reliability and validity, whilst there are limited data on usability and clinical utility. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, no observer administered pain assessment tool can be recommended as the gold standard due to limited availability and quality of the evidence that supports their validity, reliability and clinical utility. This meta-review attempts to collate the available evidence to assist clinicians to decide on what is the most appropriate tool to use in their clinical practice setting. It is important that researchers adopt a standard approach to evaluating the psychometric properties of pain assessment tools and evaluations of the clinical utility in order that the highest level of evidence can be used to guide tool selection. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12887-023-04099-7.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10278280
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102782802023-06-20 Pain assessment tools for use in infants: a meta-review Arabiat, Diana Mörelius, Evalotte Hoti, Kreshnik Hughes, Jeffery BMC Pediatr Research BACKGROUND: Identifying pain in infants is challenging due to their inability to self-report pain, therefore the availability of valid and reliable means of assessing pain is critical. OBJECTIVE: This meta-review sought to identify evidence that could guide the selection of appropriate tools in this vulnerable population. METHODS: We searched Scopus, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, MIDRIS, EMCare and Google Scholar for eligible systematic reviews. Eligible reviews documented psychometric properties of available observational tools used to assess pain in infants. RESULTS: A total of 516 reviews were identified of which 11 met our inclusion criteria. We identified 36 pain assessment tools (evaluated in 11 reviews) of which seven were reported in at least three reviews. The level of evidence reported on the psychometric properties of pain assessment tools varied widely ranging from low to good reliability and validity, whilst there are limited data on usability and clinical utility. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, no observer administered pain assessment tool can be recommended as the gold standard due to limited availability and quality of the evidence that supports their validity, reliability and clinical utility. This meta-review attempts to collate the available evidence to assist clinicians to decide on what is the most appropriate tool to use in their clinical practice setting. It is important that researchers adopt a standard approach to evaluating the psychometric properties of pain assessment tools and evaluations of the clinical utility in order that the highest level of evidence can be used to guide tool selection. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12887-023-04099-7. BioMed Central 2023-06-19 /pmc/articles/PMC10278280/ /pubmed/37337167 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12887-023-04099-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Arabiat, Diana
Mörelius, Evalotte
Hoti, Kreshnik
Hughes, Jeffery
Pain assessment tools for use in infants: a meta-review
title Pain assessment tools for use in infants: a meta-review
title_full Pain assessment tools for use in infants: a meta-review
title_fullStr Pain assessment tools for use in infants: a meta-review
title_full_unstemmed Pain assessment tools for use in infants: a meta-review
title_short Pain assessment tools for use in infants: a meta-review
title_sort pain assessment tools for use in infants: a meta-review
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10278280/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37337167
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12887-023-04099-7
work_keys_str_mv AT arabiatdiana painassessmenttoolsforuseininfantsametareview
AT moreliusevalotte painassessmenttoolsforuseininfantsametareview
AT hotikreshnik painassessmenttoolsforuseininfantsametareview
AT hughesjeffery painassessmenttoolsforuseininfantsametareview