Neonatal pain: a comparison of the beliefs and practices of junior doctors and current best evidence.

Aim: To obtain information on the practices and beliefs of junior doctors regarding neonatal pain and to compare this with best evidence.

Methods: A survey was distributed to junior doctors in five tertiary neonatal intensive care units in Sydney. Questions investigated the doctors' knowledge and treatment of pain in neonates, specifically regarding the perception and effects of pain, pain assessment tools, and the safety and efficacy of treatments for both procedural and long-term pain.

Results: The survey was completed by 33 junior doctors (77% response rate). Respondents generally had adequate knowledge about the effects of pain in neonates; however, a low proportion of respondents acknowledged the difference in long-term effects between neonates and older children. Less experienced doctors were especially unaware of this. Pain assessment tools were not perceived to be reliable, valid or routinely used, especially by less experienced doctors. Respondents were appropriately unsupportive of the use of topical anaesthetic agents. Participants acknowledged the efficacy breastfeeding and oral sucrose during short-term procedures but skin-to-skin contact and massage were less recognised as useful. Mixed opinions were noted on the benefits and risks of use of opioid analgesics, morphine infusions and midazolam but most agreed that sedation does not necessarily provide adequate pain relief. Disturbingly, doctors who were aware of the Royal Australasian College of Physicians Guidelines were more likely to agree with the routine use of midazolam in neonates.

Conclusions: Increased educational programmes should be developed to improve the knowledge of junior doctors regarding neonatal pain.