A randomized trial of rotavirus vaccine versus sucrose solution for vaccine injection pain
Introduction
Over 90% of young children demonstrate severe distress during vaccine injections [1]. Pain treatments such as sucrose solution are uncommonly used [2], [3], [4], despite a plethora of evidence demonstrating effectiveness [5]. Inadequate pain management can lead to negative experiences with vaccination and parental non-compliance with vaccination schedules [6]. Parents are dissatisfied with current analgesic practices [2], [7] and when pain-relief is provided to their children, both parents and health care providers report better satisfaction with medical care [8]. Under-utilization of analgesics during vaccination is largely attributed to the additional time and resources needed to implement them [2]. Finding feasible and cost-neutral pain-reducing methods would therefore be of interest to both clinicians and parents.
Oral rotavirus vaccine was added to the immunization schedule in Canada in 2010 and is usually given in conjunction with injectable vaccines at 2 and 4 months of age. There has been no guidance provided to clinicians about the order of administration of the oral rotavirus vaccine relative to injectable vaccines given at the same time, resulting in variability in clinical practice. Some clinicians administer the vaccine after injectable vaccines once the infant is calm, asserting that injection-induced infant crying increases the risk of spitting up the vaccine. Others administer the vaccine prior to injectable vaccines, asserting that because the rotavirus vaccine contains sweet-tasting substances (1073 mg sucrose/1.5 mL (71.5%), Rotarix™ product monograph, GlaxoSmithKline) and sucrose is known to be analgesic in infants, it can provide analgesia during the injections.
Of available pain interventions, sucrose solution has been widely recommended for use in infants due to a robust evidence base supporting its effectiveness and widespread experience with its use in the hospital setting [9], [10]. At present, there are no studies that have evaluated the analgesic properties of rotavirus vaccine. If rotavirus vaccine is demonstrated to reduce vaccine injection-induced pain, the sequence of vaccine administration could be standardized to begin with rotavirus vaccine such that exogenous sweet-tasting solutions might not need to be given. The objective of this study was to compare the analgesic effectiveness of rotavirus vaccine to sucrose solution for reducing pain from vaccine injections in infants.
Section snippets
Study design, participants and setting
We conducted a randomized controlled trial including healthy infants attending an outpatient paediatric clinic (KinderCare) in Toronto, Canada. Infants between 2 and 4 months of age receiving oral rotavirus vaccine in conjunction with primary immunizations [i.e., Diphtheria, Tetanus and acellular Pertussis/Inactivated Polio/Haemophilus influenza type b (DTaP-IPV-Hib, Pediacel™) and Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV, Prevnar™)] were included. We excluded infants with impaired neurological
Participant flow
The study was conducted between July 30, 2014 and November 18, 2014. Of the 175 parents approached for participation, 120 (69%) agreed to participate. Non-participants did not differ from participants with respect to sex distribution and mean weight: 48% male vs. 53% male; p = 0.627, and 5.9 kg (standard deviation = 1.0) vs. 5.8 kg (1.0); p = 0.709, respectively. Altogether, 60 infants were randomized to rotavirus vaccine first and 60 to sucrose solution first. Outcome data were available in all 120
Discussion
Reducing vaccination pain has important implications for health outcomes in infants as untreated pain can lead to negative experiences with vaccination and parental non-compliance with future vaccinations [6]. This study compared the effectiveness of rotavirus vaccine, an oral vaccine currently co-administered with injectable vaccines, to oral sucrose solution, an established pain-reducing treatment for infant vaccinations [5]. The results demonstrated insufficient evidence of a difference
Funding source
No external funding was secured for this study. Sucrose 24% solution supplies for the trial were provided by Equinox at no charge to investigators. Equinox was not involved in any aspect of the study.
Contributions of authors
Anna Taddio conceptualized and designed the study, provided administrative and supervision for the study, carried out the analysis, drafted the initial manuscript, and approved the final manuscript as submitted.
Daniel Flanders, Eitan Weinberg, Carol McNair, and Moshe Ipp conceptualized and designed the study, assisted in the interpretation of data, reviewed and revised the manuscript, and approved the final manuscript as submitted.
Supriya Lamba, Charmy Vyas, and Andrew F Ilersich assisted in
Acknowledgements
We wish to thank all the parents who participated with their infants and the staff at KinderCare for assistance with aspects of data collection and analysis.
Conflict of interest statement
A Taddio received research funding from Pfizer and study supplies from Ferndale and Natus for a separate clinical trial related to vaccination pain. The other authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to this article to disclose.
References (16)
- et al.
Making vaccines more acceptable—methods to prevent and minimize pain and other common adverse events associated with vaccines
Vaccine
(2001) - et al.
Effectiveness and tolerability of pharmacological and combined interventions for reducing injection pain during routine childhood immunizations: systematic review and meta-analyses
Clin Ther
(2009) - et al.
Inadequate pain management during childhood immunization: the nerve of it
Clin Ther
(2009) - et al.
Physical interventions and injection techniques for reducing injection pain during routine childhood immunizations: systematic review of randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized controlled trials
Clin Ther
(2009) - et al.
A revised measure of acute pain in infants
J Pain Symptom Manage
(1995) - et al.
Routine immunization practices: use of topical anesthetics and oral analgesics
Pediatrics
(2007) - et al.
Pain management strategies used during early childhood immunisation in Victoria
J Paediatr Child Health
(2013) - et al.
Impact of parent-directed education on parental use of pain treatments during routine infant vaccinations: a cluster randomized trial
Pain
(2015)
Cited by (18)
Overview of good practice and available methods to reduce pain and fear of vaccine according to the age
2021, Journal de Pediatrie et de PuericultureReduce vaccin pain: Sugared soluion and breastfeeding
2021, Journal de Pediatrie et de PuericultureA randomized trial of the effect of vaccine injection speed on acute pain in infants
2016, VaccineCitation Excerpt :In 6 month old infants, exogenous oral sucrose 24% solution (Tootsweet™, Equinox Specialty Products Inc.) was given prior to administration of DTaP-IPV-Hib [4]. Oral rotavirus contains high concentrations of sucrose; hence, exogenous sucrose was not warranted for younger infants [8]. Prior to the study, parents were informed of and could implement additional pain-mitigation strategies at their own discretion, including; breastfeeding, bottle-feeding, pacifiers and topical anesthetics [4].
A Systematic Review of the Psychometric Properties of the Modified Behavioral Pain Scale (MBPS)
2018, Journal of Pediatric NursingCitation Excerpt :Tables 4 to 7 provide a summary of these studies and more details can be found in Appendix A. Twenty RCTs were eligible for inclusion in this review (Abuelkheir et al., 2014; Anninger et al., 2007; Carbajal et al., 2008; Dyer et al., 2004; Fallah et al., 2016; Girish & Ravi, 2014; Hillgrove-Stuart et al., 2013; Hogan et al., 2014; Ipp et al., 2004; Ipp et al., 2007; Ipp et al., 2009; Kassab et al., 2012; Lindh et al., 2003; McGowan et al., 2013; Mularoni et al., 2009; O'Brien et al., 2004; Taddio et al., 1994; Taddio et al., 2014; Taddio et al., 2015). The MBPS was used in fifteen RCTs to assess immunisation related pain in infants aged from 1 to 20 months (Fallah et al., 2016; Girish & Ravi, 2014; Hillgrove-Stuart et al., 2013; Hogan et al., 2014; Ipp et al., 2004; Ipp et al., 2007; Ipp et al., 2009; Kassab et al., 2012; Lindh et al., 2003; McGowan et al., 2013; O'Brien et al., 2004; Taddio et al., 1994; Taddio et al., 2014; Taddio et al., 2015; Taddio et al., 2015).