The Clinical journal of pain · 2026
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Process Interventions for Reducing Distress During Vaccine Injections.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Taddio Anna, Shah Vibhuti, McMurtry C Meghan, Lang Eddy, MacDonald Noni E, Constantin Kaytlin, Uleryk Elizabeth, HELPinKids&Adults¶¶
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This systematic review was undertaken as part of a 10-year update to our 2015 clinical practice guideline about reducing distress during vaccination. Altogether, 4 clinical questions were included evaluating the effectiveness of process (ie, education and implementation) interventions targeting: (1) clinicians, (2) support persons, (3) vaccine recipients, and (4) multiple user groups (ie, multicomponent/complex interventions).
METHODS: The protocol was registered. Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials were identified from a search strategy that included 5 databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, and ProQuest Dissertations. Critical outcomes included distress (self-reported and observer-reported), along with participants' knowledge and use of distress-mitigating interventions. Data were extracted and pooled using a random effects model. Quantitative data were summarized using standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% CI. Summary statements were developed based on the certainty of evidence and magnitude of effect.
RESULTS: Seventeen unique studies were included. Across the evidence base, the certainty of evidence ranged from high to low and the magnitude of effect exceeded the minimum threshold (SMD=0.2) across available critical outcomes. The results indicate that educating clinicians may increase the use of distress-reducing interventions (SMD=0.66, low certainty). Support person education likely reduces distress in vaccine recipients slightly (SMD=-0.30; moderate certainty), may increase the use of distress-reducing interventions (SMD=0.67; low certainty), and likely increases support person knowledge about distress-reducing interventions slightly (SMD=0.25; moderate certainty). Educating vaccine recipients may result in a large reduction in distress (SMD=-0.80; low certainty). Multicomponent interventions reduce distress slightly (SMD=-0.21; high certainty) and likely increase the use of distress-reducing interventions (SMD=0.60; moderate certainty).
CONCLUSIONS: Educating and implementing interventions across relevant user groups involved in vaccinations, including clinicians, support persons, vaccine recipients, and multicomponent interventions, is recommended to reduce distress during vaccine injections.
METHODS: The protocol was registered. Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials were identified from a search strategy that included 5 databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, and ProQuest Dissertations. Critical outcomes included distress (self-reported and observer-reported), along with participants' knowledge and use of distress-mitigating interventions. Data were extracted and pooled using a random effects model. Quantitative data were summarized using standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% CI. Summary statements were developed based on the certainty of evidence and magnitude of effect.
RESULTS: Seventeen unique studies were included. Across the evidence base, the certainty of evidence ranged from high to low and the magnitude of effect exceeded the minimum threshold (SMD=0.2) across available critical outcomes. The results indicate that educating clinicians may increase the use of distress-reducing interventions (SMD=0.66, low certainty). Support person education likely reduces distress in vaccine recipients slightly (SMD=-0.30; moderate certainty), may increase the use of distress-reducing interventions (SMD=0.67; low certainty), and likely increases support person knowledge about distress-reducing interventions slightly (SMD=0.25; moderate certainty). Educating vaccine recipients may result in a large reduction in distress (SMD=-0.80; low certainty). Multicomponent interventions reduce distress slightly (SMD=-0.21; high certainty) and likely increase the use of distress-reducing interventions (SMD=0.60; moderate certainty).
CONCLUSIONS: Educating and implementing interventions across relevant user groups involved in vaccinations, including clinicians, support persons, vaccine recipients, and multicomponent interventions, is recommended to reduce distress during vaccine injections.