English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  全文笔数/总笔数 : 63187/95884 (66%)
造访人次 : 4581372      在线人数 : 312
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library & TKU Library IR team.
搜寻范围 查询小技巧:
  • 您可在西文检索词汇前后加上"双引号",以获取较精准的检索结果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜寻,建议至进阶搜寻限定作者字段,可获得较完整数据
  • 进阶搜寻

    jsp.display-item.identifier=請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw/dspace/handle/987654321/93117

    题名: Effects of combined use of non-nutritive sucking, oral sucrose, and facilitated tucking on infant behavioural states across heel-stick procedures: A prospective, randomised controlled trial
    作者: Liaw, Jen-Jiuan;Yang, Luke;Lee, Chuen-Ming;Fan, Hueng-Chuen;Chang, Yue-Cune;Li-Ping Cheng
    贡献者: 淡江大學數學學系
    关键词: Behavioural states;Facilitated tucking;Non-nutritive sucking;Oral sucrose;Infants;pain
    日期: 2013-07
    上传时间: 2013-11-21 16:49:09 (UTC+8)
    出版者: Bromley: Elsevier Ltd
    摘要: Background
    Pain and stress agitate preterm infants, interrupting their sleep. Frequent high arousal states may affect infants’ brain development and illness recovery. Preserving infants’ sleep and relieving their pain during painful procedures are both important for their health.

    To compare the effectiveness of different combinations of non-nutritive sucking (sucking), oral sucrose, and facilitated tucking (tucking) with routine care on infants’ sleep–wake states before, during, and after heel-stick procedures.

    Prospective, randomised controlled trial.

    Level III Neonatal Intensive Care Unit in Taipei.

    A convenience sample of 110 infants (gestational age 26.4–37 weeks) needing heel sticks were randomly assigned to five combinations of non-pharmacological treatments: sucking–oral sucrose–tucking; sucking–oral sucrose; oral sucrose–tucking; sucking–tucking; and routine care. Infant states, measured by a state-coding scheme, included quiet sleep, active sleep, transition, quiet awake, active awake, and fussing or crying. All states were recorded at 1-min intervals during four phases: baseline, intervention, heel-stick procedures, and recovery.

    Infants receiving sucking–oral sucrose–tucking or sucking–oral sucrose experienced 52.8% (p = 0.023) and 42.6% (p = 0.063) more quiet-sleep occurrences than those receiving routine care after adjusting for phase, baseline states, non-treatment sucking during baseline and recovery, positioning, and infants’ characteristics. Infants receiving oral sucrose–tucking, sucking–oral sucrose, sucking–oral sucrose–tucking, and sucking–tucking experienced 77.3% (p < 0.001), 72.1% (p = 0.008), 51.5% (p = 0.017), and 33.0% (p = 0.105) fewer occurrences of fussing or crying, respectively, than those receiving routine care after adjusting for related factors.

    The four treatment combinations differentially reduced infants’ high arousal across heel-stick procedures. The combined use of oral sucrose–tucking, sucking–oral sucrose, and sucking–oral sucrose–tucking more effectively reduced occurrences of infant fussing or crying than routine care. Treatment combinations of sucking–oral sucrose–tucking and sucking–oral sucrose also better facilitated infants’ sleep than routine care. To preserve infants’ sleep, clinicians should use combinations of non-nutritive sucking, oral sucrose, and facilitated tucking to reduce agitation during painful procedures.
    關聯: International Journal of Nursing Studies 50(7), pp.883-894
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.08.021
    显示于类别:[數學學系暨研究所] 期刊論文


    档案 描述 大小格式浏览次数



    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library & TKU Library IR teams. Copyright ©   - 回馈