Practices and Perceptions Regarding Pain and Pain Management during Routine Childhood Immunizations: Findings from a Focus‐Group Study with Nurses Working at Toronto Public Health, Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Despite the availability of a variety of evidence-based interventions, it has previously been reported that the majority of infants and children undergo vaccine injections without the benefit of analgesia. Nurses in public health administer a substantial number of injections; however, their attitudes and practices surrounding acute pain during vaccine injections have not been previously explored. METHODS: A focus-group interview was conducted in Toronto, Ontario, with 10 nurses who immunize children. Participants reported their perceptions and practices with regard to vaccine injection pain and pain management. RESULTS: THREE KEY THEMES EMERGED: environmental and process factors, perceptions regarding the effectiveness of different analgesic interventions, and perceptions regarding pain and fear. Participants reported a lack of control over their environment, resulting in fear and discomfort for children. They recommended increased support from external partners such as school teachers and administrators. Participants reported that pharmacological interventions, such as topical local anesthetics, were not used; however, psychological and physical interventions were commonly used. Nurses questioned the effectiveness of topical anesthetics, and indicated that more education was required regarding effective analgesic interventions. Needle pain was reported to be the most prominent concern for children undergoing vaccine injections, and children were described as being fearful. DISCUSSION: Nurses reported vaccination setting, analgesic effectiveness and relative importance given to pain as important factors for pain and pain management during vaccine injections. Future studies should explore whether additional perspectives are present in vaccinators in other geographical regions. The effectiveness of educational resources and pain management programs aimed at improving current practices should be investigated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".