↓ Skip to main content

Painful procedures and analgesia in the NICU: what has changed in the medical perception and practice in a ten-year period?

Overview of attention for article published in Jornal de Pediatria, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Painful procedures and analgesia in the NICU: what has changed in the medical perception and practice in a ten-year period?
Published in
Jornal de Pediatria, January 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jped.2015.04.009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ana Claudia Yoshikumi Prestes, Rita de Cássia Xavier Balda, Gianni Mara Silva dos Santos, Ligia Maria Suppo de Souza Rugolo, Maria Regina Bentlin, Mauricio Magalhães, Paulo Roberto Pachi, Sergio Tadeu Martins Marba, Jamil Pedro de Siqueira Caldas, Ruth Guinsburg

Abstract

To compare the use of analgesia versus neonatologists' perception regarding analgesic use in painful procedures in the years 2001, 2006, and 2011. This was a prospective cohort study of all newborns admitted to four university neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) during one month in 2001, 2006, and 2011. The frequency of analgesic prescription for painful procedures was evaluated. Of the 202 neonatologists, 188 answered a questionnaire giving their opinion on the intensity of pain during lumbar puncture (LP), tracheal intubation, mechanical ventilation (MV), and postoperative period (PO) using a 10-cm visual analogic scale (VAS; pain >3cm). For LP, 12% (2001), 43% (2006), and 36% (2011) were performed using analgesia. Among the neonatologists, 40-50% reported VAS >3 for LP in all study periods. For intubation, 30% received analgesia in the study periods, and 35% (2001), 55% (2006), and 73% (2011) of the neonatologists reported VAS >3 and would prescribe analgesia for this procedure. As for MV, 45% (2001), 64% (2006), and 48% (2011) of patient-days were under analgesia; 56% (2001), 57% (2006), and 26% (2011) of neonatologists reported VAS >3 and said they would use analgesia during MV. For the first three PO days, 37% (2001), 78% (2006), and 89% (2011) of the patients received analgesia and more than 90% of neonatologists reported VAS >3 for major surgeries. Despite an increase in the medical perception of neonatal pain and in analgesic use during painful procedures, the gap between clinical practice and neonatologist perception of analgesia need did not change during the ten-year period.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 82 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 20%
Student > Bachelor 11 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Postgraduate 7 8%
Researcher 6 7%
Other 16 19%
Unknown 18 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 23%
Psychology 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 2%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 20 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 October 2015.
All research outputs
#9,587,456
of 15,641,217 outputs
Outputs from Jornal de Pediatria
#258
of 619 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,515
of 255,025 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Jornal de Pediatria
#10
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,641,217 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 619 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 255,025 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.