Bubble Blowing As an Effective Distraction During Pediatric IV Insertion

Purpose:

To assess the effectiveness of two distraction techniques used to reduce the perceived pain of pediatric IV insertions, comparing bubble blowing versus watching videos.

Hypotheses:

1. Blowing bubbles will reduce perceived pain during IV insertions more than video watching in two- to five-year-olds.

2. Bubble-blowing will reduce child anxiety with IV insertion more than video watching.

Justification:

This study investigates whether bubble blowing is more effective in increasing patient comfort and reducing patient anxiety during IV insertions than the current standard practice. Managing patient comfort is essential because perioperative anxiety and pain lead to adverse outcomes, including prolonged induction of anesthesia, increased pain, increased incidence of postoperative delirium, and new onset negative behavioural changes.

Objectives:

• Primary Objective: To determine if bubble blowing reduces perceived pain during IV insertions more effectively than video watching in two- to five-year-old children.

• Secondary objectives: a) To compare child pain scores between bubble-blowing and video-watching groups; b) To quantify the rate of distress-free IV starts, as determined by the number of children with no worse than mildly uncomfortable.

Research Design:

This trial is designed as a randomized, controlled, superiority trial (RCT) involving children having an IV inserted in the medical imaging department; it aims to compare the effectiveness of distraction by bubble blowing versus video watching. Study participants will be randomized to either a bubble-blowing distraction group (Bubbles RCT intervention) or an iPad video-watching distraction group (Bubbles RCT control). A researcher not otherwise involved in the study will create a randomization schedule in blocks of four participants, and each participant's allocation will be concealed in envelopes. Participants and those conducting study procedures will be blinded to study allocation during recruitment. Next, the envelope will be opened, allocating the child to the control or experimental group to allow the pre-anesthetic consultation to explain what will happen and set family expectations.

Data collection procedures:

1. The research assistant (RA) will observe the child and their family and record a baseline modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety - Short Form (mYPAS-SF) score as soon as possible after consent is given.

2. Each participant will be randomized to bubble blowing group (Bubbles RCT intervention) or an iPad video-watching group (Bubbles RCT control). In both cases, the IV insertion will only occur after the topical anesthetic on the child's hands has had adequate time to take effect.

3. The Bubbles RCT control group will undergo the standard procedure for IV insertions in the medical imaging department but will utilize video distraction during IV insertions. Similarly, the Bubbles RCT intervention group will undergo the standard procedure for IV insertions in the medical imaging department but will utilize bubble-blowing distraction during IV insertion:

   1. The selected form of distraction (iPad video or Bubble blowing) will be active before the IV insertion procedure starts.

   2. The child will have their topical anesthetic removed and the IV placed quickly.

   3. The mYPAS-SF will be scored again by the RA observer as the patient enters the induction space or the clinician enters the patient's MRI anesthetic care unit (MRI-ACU) room. Pain will be assessed by the same observer using the Face Legs Activity Cry Consolability (FLACC) scale; this will be recorded twice during the IV insertion procedure (immediately before IV insertion and at the moment of skin penetration) and once more immediately after the IV insertion attempt is complete. The Bubbles RCT study ends at this point.

   4. If the IV insertion is unsuccessful on the first attempt, the provider will have discretion on how to proceed with the IV placement, including starting a second IV cannulation attempt after the final FLACC score is obtained or switching their induction of anesthesia modality.

Statistical Analysis: Participant demographics and characteristics will be tabulated and reported in a de-identified manner to protect participant privacy using descriptive statistics. Differences in FLACC pain scores between the two groups will be determined via a Wilcoxon rank sum test, as the investigators do not expect the data to be normally distributed. A linear regression model, controlling for age, sex, and baseline FLACC score, will be used to evaluate the superiority of the bubble-blowing technique. Similar analyses will be conducted for the mYPAS-SF scores.