Skip to main content
. 2012 Dec 12;2012(12):CD004950. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004950.pub3

Phillips 2005.

Methods Randomised controlled trial 
 I. Masking of randomisation ‐ low risk 
 II. Masking of intervention ‐ high risk 
 III. Masking of outcome assessment ‐ not done for outcome recorded on video camera (cry duration, percentage time crying), outcomes on monitors (heart rate, saturation, blood pressure) were masked 
 IV. Completeness of follow‐up ‐ low risk
Participants 96 stable full‐term newborn infants undergoing routine newborn screening (heel lance) were randomly assigned to one of the 3 treatment groups 
 Group 1: 32 neonates 
 Mean (range) age at procedure ‐ 37 (9) hours 
 Male: Female ‐ 13: 19 
 Group 2: 39 neonates 
 Mean (range) age at procedure 36 (8) hours 
 Male: Female ‐ 13:26 
 Group 3: 25 neonates 
 Mean (range) age at procedure 38 (14) hours 
 Male: Female ‐ 12:13
Interventions Group 1: Breastfeeding 
 Group 2: Held by mother with use of pacifier 
 Group 3: Held by research assistant with the use of pacifier
Outcomes Percentage of infants cried 
 Proportion of cry time 
 Heart rate, blood pressure and oxygen saturation change before and after the procedure
Notes  
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Adequate. Randomisation was done by blindly drawing a card from an envelope containing equal numbers of cards with letters representing each group
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) 
 All outcomes High risk Masking of intervention was not possible since it involved breastfeeding throughout the procedure. Masking of outcome assessment was not done
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes High risk Blood pressure measurements were not obtained in all infants, the authors comment that this was due to occasional malfunction of blood pressure equipment
Selective reporting (reporting bias) High risk Heart rate and oxygen saturation were secondary outcomes that were not reported on. Authors comment that there was no significant differences amongst the groups, but no data is given. Also, five babies were dropped from the study, according to the authors due to either excessive difficulties with equipment or 2 of them due to excessive physiologic instability
Other bias Unclear risk Protocol not available to compare