Procedural Pain Management for Children Receiving Physiotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This article provides an overview of literature relevant to the prevention and relief of pain and distress during physiotherapy procedures, with guidance for physiotherapists treating children. SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS: Physiotherapists are generally well trained in assessing and managing pain as a symptom of injury or disease, but there is a need to improve the identification and management of pain produced by physiotherapy procedures such as stretching and splinting. In contrast to physiotherapy, other health care disciplines, such as dentistry, nursing, paediatrics, emergency medicine, and paediatric psychology, produce extensive literature on painful procedures. Procedural pain in children is particularly important because it can lead to later fear and avoidance of necessary medical care. RECOMMENDATIONS: We emphasize the need for physiotherapists to recognize procedural pain and fear in the course of treatment using verbal, nonverbal, and contextual cues. We present many methods that physiotherapists can use to prevent or relieve procedural pain and fear in paediatric patients and provide an example of a simple, integrated plan for prevention and relief of distress induced by painful procedures.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".