Article Text

other Versions

PDF
Letters
EMLA versus glucose for PICC insertion: a randomised triple-masked controlled study
  1. Juliana Oliveira Marcatto1,2,
  2. Paula C B Vasconcelos3,
  3. Claudirene Milagres Araújo1,2,
  4. Eduardo Carlos Tavares1,
  5. Yerkes Pereira Silva1,4,5
  1. 1Department of Pediatrics, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
  2. 2Department of Nursing, José do Rosário Vellano University – UNIFENAS, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
  3. 3Department of Nursing, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
  4. 4Department of Neonatology, Julia Kubitschek Hospital – FHEMIG, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
  5. 5Department of Anesthesia, Lifecenter Hospital, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
  1. Correspondence to Juliana de Oliveira Marcatto, Rua Guilherme de Almeida 435, Apto 102, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais 30350230, Brazil; julianamarcatto{at}uol.com.br

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Preterm neonates experience a large number of painful procedures during their stay in the neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) and these procedures are often not accompanied by satisfactory analgesia.1 2 Peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) insertion is a painful intervention employed recurrently to provide a secure venous access.3,,7

The aim of this study was to determine whether 25% oral glucose or EMLA cream was a better strategy for controlling pain in preterm neonates undergoing PICC insertion.

A randomised, triple-masked controlled trial was conducted at two tertiary NICUs in the city of Belo Horizonte, Brazil. Participants included 30 preterm neonates (≥28 and <37 weeks of gestational age) during the first week of life with a clinical indication …

View Full Text

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.