Background Oversedation, delirium and immobilisation in the intensive care unit are associated with increased length of stay in the unit. Routines of systematic pain and sedation assessment and the use of valid tools are highly stressed in international guidelines. For improving the quality of pain treatment and sedation in a Norwegian intensive care unit, in 2009–2015, we compared supplementation with an analgosedation approach and the existing systematic approach, measured by the adherence to current international pain, sedation and delirium guidelines. Methods In a longitudinal study following the Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies, pain, sedation, delirium and mobilisation data from patients' complete intensive care unit stays, encompassing three separate periods of 4–6 months, were compared. The primary outcome was adherence to current protocol including assessment and documentation of patients' level of pain, sedation and prevalence of delirium at least every 8 hr, early mobilisation and titration towards a light level of sedation. Results We included 205 patients, corresponding to 1,607 patient intensive care unit days. The patient sedation levels, measured by the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale, decreased significantly, from −2.2 in 2009–−1.7 in 2015, so did the amount of administrated propofol. Mean pain scores measured by the numeric rating scale during activity were maximum 3.1 in 2014, decreasing to 2.2 in 2015. In patients not able to self‐report, pain mean scores were 1.7 in 2014 and 1.6 in 2015, measured by the Critical Care Pain Observational Tool. The number of patients unable to assess for delirium decreased significantly. By discounting the group of patients unable to assess, the prevalence of delirium varied from 32%, 25% and 33%. Conclusion The goal of having an awake patient able to cooperate, with acceptable levels of pain, was gradually achieved during a 6‐year period. The results showed that pain treatment and sedation in the intensive care unit primarily succeeded in the setting of an established routine of systematic assessment and documentation. Relevance to clinical practice The results of the study draw attention to pain treatment, sedation and delirium in intensive care patients, as well as implementation strategies aimed at achieving healthcare personnel's adherence to international guidelines in clinical practice.

Background Overall outcomes of pediatric rheumatic diseases (RD) have improved due to treatment with biologic agents and methotrexate. For many children, this treatment often entails regular needle injections. Pain and fear of needle injections are common in childhood, but how children and parents handle long-term needle injections at home has not been fully explored. This study aimed to explore how regular needle injections affect children with RD and their parents in their daily living. Methods This explorative qualitative study used individual interviews and focus groups to ensure a comprehensive investigation of the topic. Children aged 6 to 16 years (n = 7) and their parents (n = 8) were interviewed individually 4 to 6 months after the onset of needle injection treatment. The focus groups included children aged 11 to 17 years (n = 9) and parents (n = 8) with a minimum of 6 months of experience with injection treatment. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results The main themes; “challenges,” “motivational factors,” and “routines” captured experiences and strategies that influenced the continuation of needle injections at home. Many children feared the moment immediately before the needle stick, although they had become accustomed to the pain. Most parents felt insecure about handling needle injections and lacked follow-up from healthcare providers. The children’s experience of treatment effects and self-confidence were essential to maintain motivation for further injections. A number of coping strategies helped children focus away from injection related discomfort, often discovered by chance. Facilitating firm routines and shared responsibility within families helped children develop self-confidence during the procedure. Children and parents struggled to find suitable information on the Internet. Conclusions Children and parents experienced long-term needle injections challenging. They used their own limited resources and cooperated within the families to create routines and to introduce coping strategies necessary to manage and keep up with the procedure. Although the injection itself was not experienced very painful, the discomfort, worries and impact on daily life represented far more than a little needle stick, and thus needs more attention from healthcare providers.

Background Treatment of rheumatic diseases in children often includes long-term needle injections, which represent a risk for refusing medication based on potential needle-fear. How nurses manage children’s fear and pain during the initial educational training session of subcutaneous injections, may affect the management of the subsequent injections in the home settings. The aim of this study was to explore how children expressed fear and pain during these training sessions, and how adults’ communication affected children’s expressed emotions. Methods This qualitative explorative study used video observations and short interviews during training sessions in a rheumatic hospital ward. Participants were children between five and fifteen years (n = 8), their parents (n = 11) and nurses (n = 7) in nine training sessions in total. The analysis followed descriptions of thematic analysis and interaction analysis. Results The children expressed fears indirectly as cues and nonverbal signs more often than direct statements. Three children stated explicit being afraid or wanting to stop. The children worried about needle-pain, but experienced the stinging pain after the injection more bothersome. The technical instructions were detailed and comprehensive and each nurse shaped the structure of the sessions. Both nurses and parents frequently offered coping strategies unclearly without sufficient time for children to understand. We identified three main adult communication approaches (acknowledging, ambiguous and disregarding) that influenced children’s expressed emotions during the training session. Conclusions Children’s expression of fear was likely to be indirectly, and pain was mostly related to the injection rather than the needle stick. When adults used an acknowledging communication and offered sufficient coping strategies, children seemed to become involved in the procedure and acted with confidence. The initial educational training session may have a great impact on long-term repeated injections in a home setting by providing children with confidence at the onset.