The implementation of infant pain practice change resource to improve infant procedural pain practices: a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation study

Implementation of infant pain practice change (ImPaC) is a multifaceted web-based resource to support pain practice change in neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). We evaluated the (1) intervention effectiveness and (2) implementation effectiveness of ImPaC using a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation study (ie, cluster randomized controlled trial and longitudinal descriptive study). Eligible level 2 and 3 Canadian NICUs were randomized to intervention (INT) or waitlisted to usual care (UC) for 6 months. We assessed the number of painful procedures, proportion of procedures accompanied by valid assessment and evidence-based treatment, and pain intensity to determine intervention effectiveness using intention-to-treat (ITT) and wait-list (WL) analyses. Implementation feasibility and fidelity were explored. Twenty-three NICUs participated (12 INT, 11 UC). Thirty infants/NICU were included in the ITT (INT = 354, UC = 325) and the WL (INT = 678, UC = 325) analyses. In the ITT analysis, the average number of painful procedures/infant/day was lower in the INT group [2.62 (±3.47) vs 3.85 (±4.13), P < 0.001] than in the UC group. Pain assessment was greater in the INT group (34.7% vs 25.5%, P < 0.001) and pain intensity scores were lower [1.47 (1.25) vs 1.86 (1.97); P = 0.029]. Similarly, in the WL analysis, there were fewer painful procedures/infant/day [3.11 (±3.98) vs 3.85 (±4.13), P = 0.003] and increased pain assessment (30.4% vs 25.5%, P = 0.0001) and treatment (31.2% vs 24.0%, P < 0.001) in the INT group. Feasibility and implementation fidelity were associated with improved clinical outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Pain
Published
2024-12-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003496
Citations
7
Primary Topic
Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
7.76

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The implementation of infant pain practice change resource to improve infant procedural pain practices: a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation study

Rachel Flynn, Mariana Bueno, Bonnie Stevens, Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai et al.
7 citations
Pain
Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
7.76
article

The implementation of infant pain practice change resource to improve infant procedural pain practices: a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation study

Rachel Flynn, Mariana Bueno, Bonnie Stevens, Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai, Christine T. Chambers, Denise Harrison, Melanie A. Barwick, Janet Yamada, Carole A. Estabrooks, Jennifer Nan Stinson, Anne Synnes, Marsha Campbell‐Yeo, Melanie E. Noel, Sylvie LeMay, Sharyn Gibbins, Charles Victor
article en
7 citations

Abstract

Implementation of infant pain practice change (ImPaC) is a multifaceted web-based resource to support pain practice change in neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). We evaluated the (1) intervention effectiveness and (2) implementation effectiveness of ImPaC using a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation study (ie, cluster randomized controlled trial and longitudinal descriptive study). Eligible level 2 and 3 Canadian NICUs were randomized to intervention (INT) or waitlisted to usual care (UC) for 6 months. We assessed the number of painful procedures, proportion of procedures accompanied by valid assessment and evidence-based treatment, and pain intensity to determine intervention effectiveness using intention-to-treat (ITT) and wait-list (WL) analyses. Implementation feasibility and fidelity were explored. Twenty-three NICUs participated (12 INT, 11 UC). Thirty infants/NICU were included in the ITT (INT = 354, UC = 325) and the WL (INT = 678, UC = 325) analyses. In the ITT analysis, the average number of painful procedures/infant/day was lower in the INT group [2.62 (±3.47) vs 3.85 (±4.13), P < 0.001] than in the UC group. Pain assessment was greater in the INT group (34.7% vs 25.5%, P < 0.001) and pain intensity scores were lower [1.47 (1.25) vs 1.86 (1.97); P = 0.029]. Similarly, in the WL analysis, there were fewer painful procedures/infant/day [3.11 (±3.98) vs 3.85 (±4.13), P = 0.003] and increased pain assessment (30.4% vs 25.5%, P = 0.0001) and treatment (31.2% vs 24.0%, P < 0.001) in the INT group. Feasibility and implementation fidelity were associated with improved clinical outcomes.

PainVol. 166(7)
St. Michael's Hospital (CA), Dalhousie University (CA), University of British Columbia (CA), University of Ottawa (CA), University of Alberta (CA), The University of Melbourne (AU), University of Calgary (CA), University of Toronto (CA), University College Cork (IE), Trillium Health Centre (CA), Izaak Walton Killam Health Centre (CA), Hospital for Sick Children (CA), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine (CA), Public Health Ontario (CA), SickKids Foundation (CA), Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (CA), Murdoch Children's Research Institute (AU), Toronto Metropolitan University (CA), Université de Montréal (CA), RMIT University (AU)
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
7.76
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.