Skip to main content
. 2018 Oct 4;2018(10):CD005179. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005179.pub4

Pourmovahed 2013.

Study characteristics
Methods RCT. 2 arms.
Participants Number of children: 50 control, 50 treatment
Sex of children: 58 M, 42 F
Age range of children: 6 ‐ 15 years
Mean age range of children: 9.45 ± 2.80 years
Needle procedure: LP
Diagnosis of child: leukemia
Inclusion criteria: 6 ‐ 15 years, coming to oncology ward suffering from leukemia and hospitalized in the pediatric ward, alertness, verbal, subjective, visual and hearing ability, absence of pain and physiological needs (thirst, need for excretion) before injection
Exclusion criteria: patients who received a second injection, had respiratory difficulties
Setting: pediatric ward at Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran
Interventions 1. Hey‐Hu regular breathing: The Hey‐Hu technique was demonstrated to the children before injection. In this method, the child takes a deep breath, exhales while whispering hey, then inhales deeply again and exhales whispering hu. This was practiced with the child before the procedure and was then performed 1 minute before until the end of the procedure.
2. Control: No specific description was mentioned in the study.
Outcomes Pain measure:
  • Child self‐report: Wong Baker FACES pain scale


Adverse events: 3 children discontinued intervention due to respiratory difficulties.
Notes Registered in Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (Code IRCT2012102311230N1
Study dates: 2011
Funding: none stated
Conflicts of interest: none declared
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Quote: "sampling method was random (using random allocation software)" (p. 565)
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Insufficient information to permit judgment of 'low' or 'high' risk
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes High risk Study participants and personnel were not blinded
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes High risk No blinding of outcome assessment
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes Low risk Missing data balanced across groups and unlikely to be related to true outcome
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Insufficient information to permit judgment of 'low' or 'high' risk
Other bias Low risk Appears to be free of other bias that would affect outcomes