The influence of skin-to-skin contact on Cortical Activity during Painful procedures in preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit (iCAP mini): Study protocol for a randomized control trial.

The influence of skin-to-skin contact on Cortical Activity during Painful procedures in preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit (iCAP mini): Study protocol for a randomized control trial. | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article The influence of skin-to-skin contact on Cortical Activity during Painful procedures in preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit (iCAP mini): Study protocol for a randomized control trial. Marsha Campbell-Yeo, Britney Benoit, Aaron Newman, Celeste Johnson, and 3 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-1510675/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 4 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background . Strong evidence suggests that maternal infant skin-to-skin contact (SSC) is effective in reducing behavioural responses to pain. Given the multi-sensory benefits of SSC, it is highly likely that SSC provided during pain in early life may reduce pain-induced brain activity. The aim of this study is to examine the effect of SSC compared to 24% sucrose on pain-induced activity in the preterm infant brain during a medically required heel lance. Secondary objectives include determining a) differences between behavioural pain response and noxious-related brain activity during heel lance; and b) rate of adverse events across groups. Methods . We will randomly assign 126 babies (32 to 36 completed weeks gestational age) admitted to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, and their mothers within the first seven days of age to receive: i) SSC plus sterile water; ii) 24% oral sucrose. Each baby will receive a medically indicated heel lance, following a no treatment baseline period. The primary outcome is noxious-related brain activity measured using an electroencephalogram (EEG) pain-specific event-related potential. Secondary outcomes include pain intensity measured using a bio-behavioural infant pain assessment tool (Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised) and rate of adverse events. Discussion This will be the first clinical trial to compare the effect of SSC and 24% sucrose on pain-induced brain activity in the preterm infant brain during a clinical noxious stimulus, measured using EEG. Given the negative neurodevelopmental outcomes associated with unmanaged pain, it is imperative that preterm babies receive the most effective pain-reducing treatments to improve their health outcomes. Our findings will have important implications in informing optimal pain assessment and management in preterm infants. Trial registration : ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03745963. Date of registration: November 19, 2018. infant/neonate prematurity pain acute skin-to-skin contact sweet taste EEG evoked potentials cortical bio-behavioural assessment RCT Figures Figure 1 Background And Rationale {6a} Humans in the last trimester of gestation are assumed to be in a pain free environment in the womb. However, one in every ten babies worldwide are born preterm and often spend weeks in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) where they will undergo numerous painful procedures as part of their routine care 1 – 5 . A recent systematic review of epidemiological studies reported that preterm infants underwent a daily average of 12 painful procedures, with the majority receiving no interventions to alleviate pain 6 . These findings are consistent with a Canadian survey carried out by members of this research team, which indicated that higher exposure to painful procedures and lack of pain relieving interventions were the most frequent in the youngest and sickest neonates 7 . At one time it was believed that preterm infants did not experience pain, but two decades of behavioural observation studies 8 – 11 , as well as recent studies using near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) 12 , 13 , electroencephalography (EEG) 14 – 17 , and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) 18 to document cortical responses to noxious stimuli provides compelling evidence that infants as young as 25 weeks gestational age experience pain. In addition to immediate deleterious physiological effects and suffering, untreated early pain has been associated with long term consequences in children, including cognitive 19 , 20 and language deficits 21 , motor delays 22 , 23 , behavioural problems 24 , and poor executive functioning 24 – 26 . In addition to outcomes assessed through standardized measures, imaging studies have demonstrated decreased frontal and parietal brain width 27 , and altered diffusion measures and functional connectivity in the temporal lobes 28 of infants highly exposed to pain. Sweet tasting solutions and non-pharmacological pain management in the NICU . While pharmacological interventions may appear to be a logical solution to minimize pain, they can be inadequate, unavailable, or impractical for the most common procedures such as heel lance, venipuncture, intravenous insertion, or intramuscular injection 29 – 31 . This is of significant concern, as together these procedures make up 94% of tissue-breaking painful exposures experienced by infants in hospital 32 . As such, we and others have examined the effectiveness of alternative interventions such as sweet tasting solutions (sucrose 33 or glucose 34 ) and non-pharmacological strategies (skin-to-skin contact 35 (SSC), often referred to as kangaroo care, which is the upright ventral holding of a diaper clad baby on the bare chest of a mother or alternate care provider), non-nutritive sucking (pacifier) 36 , or swaddling (bundling in a blanket) 36 to reduce neonatal pain response. There is now strong evidence from Cochrane and other systematic reviews that, based on bio-behavioural measures (physiological, facial, or body responses), oral sucrose 33 and non-sucrose sweet tasting solutions 34 , as well as SSC 35 , are the most effective methods to reduce pain associated with commonly performed needle-related and tissue-breaking procedures in preterm infants in the NICU. Despite this evidence, there remains little understanding of the effect of these interventions on nociceptive (i.e., pain-related) responses in the neonatal brain. Specifically, whether interventions used in clinical practice lead to modulation or blunting of noxious pain-related brain responses, or solely depresses the expression of behavioural responses (e.g., facial actions). A recent systematic review including 74 human studies (n = 7049) 33 has shown that intra-oral sucrose (currently considered standard of care for hospitalized infants) effectively reduces bio-behavioural responses of preterm infants undergoing procedural pain. Although widely practiced, there is some evidence that brings the analgesic efficacy of sucrose into question. In one study by Slater 15 , reported in the Lancet, sucrose decreased bio-behavioural pain scores in infants undergoing heel lance when compared to a no treatment control, however, sucrose did not significantly reduce the amplitude of a Noxious-related event-related potential measured using EEG, suggesting that its effects may be sedative in nature rather than analgesic 15 . These findings support concerns raised by Abbott and Guy 37 , who demonstrated using a rat pup model that while behavioural response to pain was similar between rats that were administered morphine and pentobarbital, only morphine blunted the nociceptive pain specific response, demonstrating the difficulty in discerning between sedation and analgesia using solely bio-behavioural measures. Objectives {7} The primary objective of this study is to characterize the effect of SSC condition compared to 24% oral sucrose on noxious-evoked brain activity in the preterm infant brain during a clinically required heel lance procedure Secondary objectives are to determine: a) differentiation between bio-behavioural pain response and noxious-related brain activity elicited by clinical heel lance; b) frequency of adverse events between interventions across groups; and c) maternal acceptability of study participation. Hypotheses Primary : Infants randomized to the SSC condition, when compared to infants randomized to the 24% oral sucrose condition, will demonstrate a lower amplitude pain-specific event related potential during a clinical (heel lance) noxious stimulus. Secondary : Infants randomized to the SSC condition, when compared to infants randomized to the 24% oral sucrose, will demonstrate: a) less differentiation between bio-behavioural pain response and noxious-evoked pain activity elicited by clinical (heel lance) noxious stimulus; and b) fewer adverse events (i.e., episodes of choking, apnea, bradycardia, temperature instability, need for repeat heel lance or “rescue sucrose” doses). Trial design {8} A single centre, single blind, parallel randomized controlled two arm trial design, similar to our previous studies in this population, 38 will be utilized. Infants will be randomized to i) SSC; or ii) 24% oral sucrose where they will undergo a clinically required heel lance. All aspects of the study will undergo institutional ethical approval. No infant will undergo pain associated with a heel lance procedure without intervention as per recent recommendations 39 . Methods: Participants, Interventions, And Outcomes Study setting {9} The study will be conducted in the NICU of the IWK Health in Halifax, Nova Scotia, a 40-bed tertiary level referral unit. Eligibility criteria {10} Infants considered to be medically stable, whose parents have provided informed consent, and require a clinically indicated heel lance, will be recruited to participate. Infants delivered between 32 and 36 completed weeks gestational age (GA) at birth admitted to NICU whose parents can read and write English will be approached for inclusion within the first seven days of age. Determination of stability will be made in consultation with the attending neonatal staff. Exclusion criteria are major congenital anomalies, received or receiving opioids in previous 24 hours, immediate post-op surgical period (< 72 hours), history of hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy requiring cooling, and contraindication for sucrose administration (e.g., unable to swallow, paralysis) due to safety concerns or inability to assess pain accurately. Who will take informed consent? {26a} Consent for the research team to approach potentially eligible participants will be facilitated by the clinical team. A research nurse will determine eligibility, provide study information, and obtain signed informed consent. Additional consent provisions for collection and use of participant data and biological specimens {26b} N/A: No biological specimens were collected as part of this trial. Interventions Explanation for the choice of comparators {6b} Currently, the provision of 24% sucrose prior to a heel lance is considered standard of care and will be used as a comparator to SSC. 24% Sucrose (0.1 ml) will be delivered by a research nurse experienced in NICU care, onto the anterior surface of the tongue, commencing two minutes prior to data collection, doses may be repeated every two minutes throughout the painful procedure as deemed necessary by the clinical care provider 40 . The only modification to usual practice will be to position the infant to ensure optimal data readings from the EEG net and to visualize their face on the video recording, to enable scoring of pain responses Intervention description {11a} Intervention Arm Infants allocated to the SSC arm will be placed in upright, ventral SSC with their mother at least 15 minutes prior to data collection. Criteria for discontinuing or modifying allocated interventions {11b} It is unlikely that there will be a need to modify the allocation intervention. However, parents may choose to withdraw their infant from the study for any reason at any time. Strategies to improve adherence to interventions {11c} Every effort will be made to ensure fidelity of the intervention. Any deviation will be documented using an intervention fidelity checklist completed by the research nurse at the end of the procedure. Any need for additional (e.g., rescue) pain management strategies will be monitored and compared monthly across groups. Relevant concomitant care permitted or prohibited during the trial {11d} No other changes in clinical care will occur outside the study interventions. Provisions for post-trial care {30} N/A: There is no post-trial care in this trial. Outcomes {12} Noxious-related brain activity will be measured from a pain-related event-related potential 14 – 16 , 41 induced by a clinically required heel lance measured using a dense-array neonatal EEG recording. The primary outcome attributed to the clinically required heel lance will be a noxious-related N420-P560 event-related potential (ERP). This site corresponds to E19 on the 32 channel HydroCel Geodesic Sensor Net at electrode Pz, which will specifically be examined and isolated as previous research has reported pain-related activity at this site in both neonates 14 , 16 , 42 and adults 43 . The EEG data will be recorded using a 32 channel HydroCel Geodesic Sensor Net connected to a GES 400 EEG system (EGI, Eugene, OR, USA). Electrodes will be submerged for five minutes in a solution of warm water and infant shampoo. Electrode impendences will be checked to ensure they are below the impedance threshold of 100 kΩ. NetStation Acquisition software (version 5.2.0.2) will be used for recording of EEG activity from 0.5 to 30 Hz with a sampling rate of 1000 samples per second and a conversion of 24 bit. For all infants, regardless of randomization, data collection will begin with a continuous recording of a one-minute baseline of all outcome measures while the infant is resting in their incubator or cot (BL1). Following this, a non-noxious (NN1) control stimulus will be applied to the infant’s foot to capture a baseline response on EEG to a non-painful event. This non-noxious (sham) stimulus will consist of placing the heel lance against the foot and rotating it 90 degrees, so that when the lance is released it mimics the sensation of the heel lance procedure without the associated tissue-breaking and pain. The infant will then be placed in their assigned intervention group and will be re-exposed to the non-noxious control stimulus, followed by the clinical heel lance. The method for time locking the non-noxious stimulus and noxious heel lance to the EEG recording in this study involves the use of audio-recording equipment to time-lock based on the audible spring-blade release of the heel lance. During both events, the lancet will be released. The sound of the heel lance release will be captured using a lapel microphone held by the research coordinator close to the infant’s foot, amplified through an USB audio interface (M-Audio Fast Track, M-Audio Inc., Cumberland, Rhode Island, USA), and linked to the EEG amplifier using an EGI Audio-Visual (AV) device through an AV device DIN adaptor and hypergrip cable (EGI, Eugene, Oregon, USA). This apparatus ensures that the sound associated with heel lance release is marked with millisecond precision on the continuous EEG recording. To test the accuracy of this time-locking method and ensure there is no latency through the audio-computer interface, the microphone input line and audio output line were connected to a digital oscilloscope and relative timing of the activity on both lines were observed during microphone activation. There was no appreciable latency between input and output, indicating a precise time-locking mechanism to isolate a pain-specific ERP. Pain intensity will be assessed using the Premature Infant Pain Profile - Revised (PIPP-R) 44 , 45 . The original PIPP was developed by Stevens et al. in 1996 46 and revised in 2012 44 . The PIPP includes two physiological (heart rate, oxygen saturation), three behavioural (brow bulge, eye squeeze, nasolabial furrow), and two contextual (GA, behavioural state [BS]) variables known to modify pain responses. Each variable is scored on a four-point scale (0, 1, 2, 3) reflecting changes in magnitude from baseline values. GA and BS are reverse-scored to account for developmental and state differences in preterm and term infants abilities to respond to pain 46 . In the PIPP-R, the original seven variables of the PIPP are retained, but ordering and scoring of GA and BS has changed to ensure baseline characteristics prior to the painful event do not artificially inflate scores. The PIPP-R has demonstrated construct validation in infants of varying GAs during extreme group comparisons 44 . As facial actions are the most specific bio-behavioural indicator of acute procedural pain in newborn infants 47 , the three individual facial actions within the PIPP-R will be analyzed separately in addition to the composite PIPP-R score. Physiologic and behavioural data collection techniques, which have been developed and used extensively by this research team over the past decade, will be employed 48 , 49 . For physiologic variables, heart rate and oxygen saturation will be measured continuously throughout the procedure via a pulse oximeter placed on the infant’s hand and recorded on the GES 400 EEG System 400 Physio 16 II. Behavioural state will be observed for 30 seconds prior to the noxious stimulus from video, and GA will be determined from the medical record. Time locking of the noxious-evoked stimulus and heel lance will be synchronized with EEG recordings, physiological data, and behavioural data using the time trigger device described previously. Electronic event markers will be used to synchronize all physiological and behavioural data, and to indicate four distinct phases of the standardized heel lance: i) baseline data collection for two minutes; ii) two minutes during and following sucrose administration; iii) heel lance; and iv) return to baseline for two minutes. Pain intensity will be calculated by trained coders, blinded to the study purpose and design, using newly developed facial coding software (Pain Assessment in Neonates, [PAiN]) developed recently by the Principal Investigator (PI) for previous research 38 . Inter-rater reliability of greater than 0.8 50 with the trained coders for the PIPP-R scores will be established prior to data collection and monitored throughout the study using a random selection of infants after 20 infants are entered into the study. See Fig. 1 for overview of data collection procedures. Adverse events and safety monitoring. As the HydroCel Geodesic Sensor Net requires that electrode sponges are soaked in a warm saline solution prior to application to the infant scalp, a thermal cap will be placed over the sensor net during data collection to reduce heat loss. Infant axillary temperature will be monitored every 15 minutes throughout data collection to ensure normothermia (36.5 to 37.5 degrees centigrade). Infants will be monitored constantly during data collection (observation and continuous cardiorespiratory and oxygen saturation recording) in order to prevent any risk of skin irritation while wearing the HydroCel Geodesic Sensor Net as well any incidence of choking, apnea (defined as unexplained cessation of breathing for 20 seconds or longer, or a shorter respiratory pause associated with bradycardia, cyanosis, pallor, and/or hypotonia 51 ), or bradycardia (defined as a 30 beat per minute drop from baseline, or when the heart rate is below 100 beats per minute). Adverse events, need for a repeat heel lance to allow for sufficient blood collection, or administration of additional doses of “rescue” sucrose will also be recorded on the tolerance/adverse events section of the intervention fidelity checklist, which has been developed and validated in previous research by the PI 38 . Demographic and background clinical data characterizing the sample that will be collected from maternal and infant hospital charts will include: maternal age, maternal parity, maternal experience providing skin-to-skin contact to previous children, maternal medications, history of maternal diabetes during pregnancy, infant GA at birth, infant postnatal age at time of study participation, mode of delivery, infant birth weight, infant Apgar scores, infant sex, total number of previous painful procedures, primary diagnoses, severity of illness (Neonatal Therapeutic Interventions Scoring System [NTISS] 52 , Score for Neonatal Acute Physiology-II [SNAP II] 53 , and whether the infant has a history of receiving opioids. Participant timeline {13} [Figure 1] Sample size {14} Using a priori data 15 , we will require 63 participants per group (total sample size of 126 for the two groups) to detect a 30% reduction in amplitude of the pain-specific ERP on EEG during the clinically required heel lance. The sample size calculation accounts for multiple testing across intervention groups, and is based on a type I error probability of 5%, and power of 80% 54 . Sixty-three participants per group also allows us to detect the smallest clinically important difference of one on the PIPP-R scale, with a standard deviation of two, considered a clinically relevant difference between the active interventions of SSC and 24% oral sucrose 55 . Recruitment {15} Recruitment is ongoing with expected enrollment of, on average, four participants monthly. Assignment of interventions: Allocation Sequence generation {16a} Participants will be randomized to groups using a password-protected REDCap database randomization tool. Sequence generation will be conducted using a computer-generated random number list know only to a consultant statistician not associated with the study and made available through the online portal. Randomization will be block-stratified by age (32 to or equal to 34 week to 36 completed weeks GA) to ensure the intervention groups are balanced with respect to GA. Intervention allocation concealment will be achieved by using randomly permuted blocks of two, four, and six 56 to minimize risk of allocation bias. Concealment mechanism {16b} Allocation will be made available only at the time of randomization when the research personnel access the online portal. Intervention allocation concealment will be achieved by using randomly permuted blocks of two, four, and six 56 to minimize risk of allocation bias, unknown to the research team. Implementation {16c} Following consent and prior to the medically indicated procedure, the research nurse will randomize the infant to obtain the study intervention allocation from the online portal. Once provided the information from the site, the research nurse will inform mothers of their study arm allocation and facilitate the timing of each infants’ clinically required heel lance with the clinical team. Assignment of interventions: Blinding Who will be blinded {17a} In keeping with clinical trials where interventions cannot be blinded, we will ensure that data will be collected independently from those conducting analysis (blinded to group allocation) to minimize bias. Mothers, staff, and research nurses and assistants completing data collection will not be blinded to whether the infant has been randomly assigned to SSC condition or the 24% oral sucrose condition. All individuals carrying out data analysis will be blinded to group assignment. Additionally, EEG data analysts will have no prior knowledge of study groups and assignment. Close up video of the infants face during the painful procedure with no sound will be recorded to ensure that coders will be blinded to all aspects of group allocation and study purpose. Procedure for unblinding if needed {17b} It is not anticipated that there will be a need to unblind the data prior to analyses. Data collection and management Plans for assessment and collection of outcomes {18a} Set-up of EEG equipment, video recording, and physiological monitoring is anticipated to take 20–30 minutes. Baseline measurements (BL1 and BL2, two minutes each), stabilization in SSC after transfer (15 minutes), and heel lance procedure (three to five minutes) is estimated to take 20–25 minutes for a total data collection period of 40–60 minutes. Infants will be followed until completion of a regularly scheduled heel lance procedure. Plans to promote participant retention and complete follow-up {18b} Follow-up is completed within minutes of finishing the procedure; therefore, it is unlikely there will be missing data due to loss to follow-up. Data management {19} Collection of both bio-behavioural data and pain-specific ERPs on EEG have been previously demonstrated in clinical trials with this patient population 16 , 57 . A challenge that may be encountered during data collection is loss of physiologic data (e.g., heart rate and electrophysiologic measurements) due to equipment failure or movement artifact. EEG procedures will be employed to control for and limit loss due to artifact. Research personnel experienced in EEG techniques will be present during data collection to monitor data recordings and make prompt adjustments in the instance of any recording malfunctions to limit data loss. Confidentiality {27} Study participants will not be identified in any reports or publications of this research. Participant study data and videotapes will be kept in a locked file cabinet in a locked office at IWK Health. All data will have participant names removed and identified only by a code. The code will be kept in a locked file cabinet in a locked office at IWK Health. Study records will be kept for a minimum of 10 years. Only the staff involved in the research will see them. Members of the IWK Research Ethics Audit Committee or delegates of the Nova Scotia Health Research Foundation may look at the records to ensure the study is being conducted properly. Plans for collection, laboratory evaluation and storage of biological specimens for genetic or molecular analysis in this trial/future use {33} N/A: No biological specimens were collected as part of this trial. Statistical methods Statistical methods for primary and secondary outcomes {20a} Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize baseline characteristics using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, IBM Corporation, Armonk, New York, USA). Student t tests and chi-square tests will be used, as appropriate, to assess potential differences across intervention groups at baseline. Noxious-related brain activity. Data from the EEG recordings will be processed and statistically analyzed using the MNE (v. 0.24.0) 58 , and the event-related potential (ERP) Principal Component Analysis (PCA) Toolkit (v. 2.76) 59 in MATLAB (MathWorks Inc., Natick, Massachusetts, USA). For artifact detection and correction, a copy of the continuous EEG data will be bandpass filtered using MNE from 1–30 Hz using a zero-phase finite impulse response filter with a hamming window. This raw, continuous EEG data will be segmented into epochs time-locked to the event markers of experimental interest (including noxious and non-noxious stimuli), ranging from 500 ms prior to each event marker to 1000 ms after, with each segment normalized by subtracting the mean amplitude value over the segment from each time point (effectively centering each segment at 0 µV). Epochs will be excluded if they contain movement artifacts on electrode E19, an area associated with pain-related activity in both infants 14 – 16 and adults 43 . Any epochs containing peak-to-peak signal amplitudes exceeding 150 µV will be considered contaminated with movement artifacts 60 . The data reduction technique of x (PCA 59 will be applied to the data at electrode Pz to identify mathematically independent components of the waveform. The resulting principal components (PCs) represent systematic variation in the amplitude of the EEG signal at different time points across the EEG tracing. The latency and amplitude of the generated principal components will be examined and the PC corresponding to a N420-P560 will be retained for subsequent phases of the analysis. Four principal components will be examined: two PCs for the SSC group (PC for non-noxious control stimulus, PC for noxious heel lance) and two PCs for the sucrose group (PC for non-noxious control stimulus, PC for noxious heel lance). Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test will be run to assess the effect of stimulation type (non-noxious control stimulus, noxious heel lance) and treatment (SSC and sucrose) on the peak amplitude of the principal components. With this analysis, it is possible to assess if 1) exposure to heel lance produces a pain-specific component and 2) if the magnitude of this component varies between intervention groups 14 , 61 . If there are identified differences between groups in any potential confounding variables (i.e., prior pain exposure, infant sex) analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) will be utilized to adjust for the potential effect of these covariates. Pain intensity. An overall between-group comparison of the PIPP-R scores will be performed using an ANCOVA, where the covariate will be the GA stratification variable. If the overall comparison is significant at the 5% level, then the paired comparisons will be performed using a similar ANCOVA model. An appropriate multiple comparison Bonferroni procedure will be used to control the overall type I error probability. To conduct the subgroup analysis for GA, an interaction term will be added to the ANCOVA model. In each trial the binary adverse events variables will be compared using a multiple logistic model with intervention group and GA as independent variables. To control for multiplicity due to the number safety variables, a 5% significance will be used. Adverse events . Mean frequency of occurrence of each of the safety surveillance outcomes will be compared across the groups using t-tests, with post-hoc tests for intervention condition as appropriate. Interim analyses {21b} One analysis of the primary outcome is planned at study end. There are no plans for an interim analysis. Methods for additional analyses (e.g. subgroup analyses) {20b} A subgroup analysis based on GA will be conducted. Methods in analysis to handle protocol non-adherence and any statistical methods to handle missing data {20c} It is not anticipated that there will be an issue with protocol non-adherence given that data are collected over a single intervention and that participants are infants. Plans to give access to the full protocol, participant level-data, and statistical code {31c} The protocol will be freely available through an open access publication. There are no plans to have participant-level dataset, and statistical code readily available, however, individual requests will be considered. Oversight and monitoring Composition of the coordinating centre and trial steering committee {5d} The PI will be responsible for the overall program of research. A 0.5 FTE Research Coordinator will be hired for the day-to-day management of the trial including study personnel, under the supervision of the PI. The PI, Co-I’s, and Research Coordinator will comprise the RCT Steering Committee. The Steering Committee will meet bi-monthly in year one, quarterly thereafter in person and via teleconference, and at the end of the study to discuss results and dissemination. Composition of the data monitoring committee, its role and reporting structure {21a} A data safety monitoring committee (DSMC) will be established consisting of three individuals (with expertise in neonatology, neuroscience, or biostatistics), independent of the investigators who have no financial, scientific, or other conflicts of interest with the trial. Adverse event reporting and harms {22} The collection, assessment, and reporting of adverse events and other unintended effects of trial interventions or trial conduct will be done in accordance with Good Clinical Guideline Practices and Research Ethics Board (REB) approvals. Frequency and plans for auditing trial conduct {23} All study documents will be kept in accordance with Good Clinical Guideline Practices and REB approvals. There are no planned audits, however, institutional auditing of clinical trials independent from investigators occur routinely. Plans for communicating important protocol amendments to relevant parties (e.g. trial participants, ethical committees) {25} If any important protocol modifications (e.g., changes to eligibility criteria, outcomes, analyses) are required, communication of these changes will made through online portals (i.e., ethics, clincialtrials.gov.), or email reports will be forwarded to relevant parties (e.g., investigators, REB, trial participants, trial registries, journals, regulators). Dissemination plans {31a} Knowledge translation initiatives will be ongoing throughout the research process, with initial emphasis on raising healthcare professional and public awareness and interest in newborn pain management followed by increased knowledge and changing behaviours through updating of relevant policies and practices. Regular updates on the progress of the study will be provided to health professionals and managers on the participating unit via face-to-face meetings. When results from the study become available, focus will also be placed on targeting researchers, healthcare providers, administrators, and decision makers with new knowledge to inform newborn pain assessment and management practices, as well as subsequent research in the field. Three reports (1, 3, and 10 pages) will be generated for key clinical and policy stakeholders to disseminate the findings of the study. These reports will be disseminated nationally and internationally through existing affiliations with the Canadian Neonatal Network, Canadian Association of Pediatric Health Centres, Canadian Pediatric Society, both Canadian and International councils of Neonatal Nurses, Vermont Oxford Neonatal Network, and Nordic Pain in Early Life Association. Traditional end of grant knowledge translation initiatives targeting researchers and knowledge users will include publication in high impact academic peer-reviewed journals (e.g., Pediatrics, JAMA Pediatrics, PAIN, Birth), presentation at national and international conferences (e.g., International Symposium on Pediatric Pain, Canadian Pain Society Annual Scientific Meeting, Pediatric Academic Society, Council of International Neonatal Nurses), and presentations and webinars to key clinical decision makers and healthcare providers in the clinical setting locally and worldwide (e.g., Family Centered Care Council, National Canadian Premature Baby Association and March of Dimes). Our team has a strong online presence and will share study results as appropriate over social media platforms including Facebook and Twitter, as well as press releases to raise widespread public, healthcare provider, and parent awareness. Collectively, our team has contributed to practice change in our local institutions and worldwide through clinical practice guidelines. The PI and several members of the team regularly give public presentations (e.g., CIHR Café Scientifique) and disseminate research findings through print, radio, and television media. A YouTube video produced by the PI for parents to reduce pain in newborns has been viewed > 165,000 times in > 152 countries and was awarded first place in the inaugural CIHR Video Talks Competition. Moreover, the Centre for Pediatric Pain Research (CPPR), where the PI is based, has successfully reached millions of parents and care providers through the CIHR funded “It Doesn’t Have to Hurt” initiative in partnership with YummyMummyClub.ca to improve pain care for children. Discussion To the best of our knowledge, we will be the first sufficiently powered randomized clinical trial examining the effect of SSC provided during a medically indicated heel lance on pain induced activity in the preterm brain compared to the provision of 24% sucrose. Why might maternal infant skin-to-skin contact (SSC) be different? Tactile perception is one of the first senses of fetal development, emerging at approximately seven to eight weeks gestation 62 . Thus, all newborns have the ability to perceive physical touch and demonstrate positive responses to stroking or massage 63 . Human infants have been shown to demonstrate reduced behavioural stress and improved sleep following gentle human touch 64 , 65 and massage 66 , 67 . Additionally, animal models of neonatal touch have demonstrated increases in endorphins, oxytocin, and serotonin – hormones that have been associated with modulating pain response 68 – 71 . While no studies to date have examined the neural mechanisms underlying the analgesic effect of touch on pain responses in infants, there is evidence to suggest that simple touch modulates nociceptive specific responses in adults 72 . When A delta and C nociceptors were selectively activated by high power laser pulses in healthy adults, application of tactile stimulation significantly reduced cortical laser-evoked potentials 72 and laser blink reflex (which is generated by brain stem circuits before nociceptive signals reach the cortex) 72 . This suggests a blunting of both cortical and sub-cortical nociceptive responses secondary to tactile stimulation. Evidence related to SSC demonstrates significant benefit such as stabilization of physiologic parameters (e.g., temperature, heart, and respiratory rates), decreased occurrence of apneas, improved weight gain and growth, and accelerated maturation of autonomic and circadian systems 63,73−77 . Related to this proposal, SSC has demonstrated benefit as an effective pain-relieving intervention for infants undergoing needle-related procedural pain 78 . In a recent update of our Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis, including 25 studies (n = 2001 infants), SSC significantly reduced composite pain scores measured by the PIPP 46 at 30 (n = 268, MD -3.21, 95% CI -3.94 to -2.48), 60 (n = 164, MD -1.85, 95% CI -3.03 to -0.68), and 90 (n = 163, MD -1.34, 95% CI -2.56 to -0.13) seconds following painful procedures. Of note, while holding a clothed baby provides some comfort, it appears that direct SSC is significantly more effective 79 . The underlying mechanisms of SSC are thought to be associated with blunting of sympathetic nervous system responses and up-regulation of parasympathetic nervous system responses through physiological neural regulators 80 . Specifically, SSC may elicit an inborn tactile receptor response that regulates vagal tone and release of endogenous opiates, oxytocin, and beta-endorphins 81 , 82 . This proposed mechanism of action differs significantly from the primary gustatory mechanism of sweet tasting solutions. As such, it is highly plausible that SSC may inhibit nociceptive responses in the preterm brain 60 , 83 . Summary and Justification for the Proposed Research While there is strong evidence of the effectiveness of oral sucrose and SSC to reduce bio-behavioral responses to pain, based on the current standard of assessment, optimal pain management in the NICU is precluded by our lack of understanding of the effect of these interventions on a) noxious pain-related responses in the neonatal brain, (b) the efficacy of SSC when compared to sucrose on noxious pain-related brain activity, and (c) the relationship between noxious-evoked brain activity and bio-behavioural responses to noxious stimuli in preterm infants. The proposed research study will address these significant gaps. The results of the study may help increase awareness and inform behaviour change and practice regarding the importance of parent presence and engagement in pain care in the NICU. Trial Status The trial is currently in the recruitment phase. Recruitment began on November 19, 2018 and is estimated to be completed on September 30, 2022. Protocol Version 1.0 (23OCT2018). Abbreviations ANOVA - Analysis of Variance ANCOVA - Analysis of Covariance BS - Behavioural State CPPR - Centre for Pediatric Pain Research DSMC - Data Safety Monitoring Committee EEG - Electroencephalography ERP - Event-Related Potential fMRI - Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging GA - Gestational Age iCAP mini - The influence of skin-to-skin contact on Cortical Activity during Painful procedures in preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit mN - Millinewtons NTISS - Neonatal Therapeutic Interventions Scoring System NICU - Neonatal Intensive Care Unit NIRS - Near Infrared Spectroscopy PAiN - Pain Assessment in Neonates PCA – Principal Component Analysis PCs - Principal Components PI - Principal Investigator PIPP - Premature Infant Pain Profile PIPP-R - Premature Infant Pain Profile Revised REB - Research Ethics Board SNAP II - Score for Neonatal Acute Physiology-II SSC - Skin-To-Skin Contact Declarations Authors’ contributions { 31b} MC-Y is the Principal Investigator; she conceived the study, led the proposal and protocol development. MC-Y oversaw all aspects of the conduct of the study. BB contributed to study design. BB, AN, TB and AJ provided expertise regarding EEG procedures, data handling, and analysis procedures. BS and CJ provided expertise related to infant pain and bio-behavioural pain assessment. All authors contributed to development of the proposal and approved the final manuscript. Funding {4} Nova Scotia Health Research Foundation, Project #1023060 Availability of data and materials {29} The Principal Investigator and study team will have access to the final trial dataset. Ethics approval and consent to participate {24} IWK Health Ethical Review and approval #1023060. Written, informed consent to participate will be obtained from all participants. Consent for publication {32} Consent form available as supplementary materials. Competing interests {28} The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Web links and URLs: The Mom-Linc Lab http://momlinc.ca References Anand KS. New perspectives on the definition of pain. Pain. 1996;67:3–6. Johnston CC, Collinge JM, Henderson SJ, Anand KJ. A cross-sectional survey of pain and pharmacological analgesia in Canadian neonatal intensive care units. Clin J Pain. 1997 Dec;13(4):308–12. Barker DP, Rutter N. Exposure to invasive procedures in neonatal intensive care unit admissions. Arch Dis Child. 1995;72:47–8. Simons SH, van Dijk M, Anand KS, Roofthooft D, van Lingen RA, Tibboel D. Do we still hurt newborn babies? A prospective study of procedural pain and analgesia in neonates. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003;157(11):1058–64. Stevens B, McGrath P, Gibbins S, Beyene J, Breau L, Camfield C, et al. Procedural pain in newborns at risk for neurologic impairment. Pain. 2003;105(1–2):27–35. Cruz MD, Fernandes AM, Oliveira CR. Epidemiology of painful procedures performed in neonates: A systematic review of observational studies. Eur J Pain. 2016 Apr;20(4):489–98. Johnston CC, Filion F, Campbell-Yeo M, Goulet C, Bell L, McNaughton K, et al. Kangaroo mother care diminishes pain from heel lance in very preterm neonates: A crossover trial. BMC Pediatr. 2008 Dec;24(1):13. 8(. Grunau RV, Low MD. Cognitive and task-related EEG correlates of arithmetic performance in adolescents. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1987;9(5):563–74. Johnston CC, Stevens BJ, Yang F, Horton L. Differential response to pain by very premature neonates. Pain. 1995;61(3):471–9. Stevens B, Johnston C. Physiologic responses of premature infants to a painful stimulus. Nurs Res. 1994;43:226–31. Stevens B, Johnston C, Horton L. Factors that influence the behavioural pain responses of premature infants. Pain. 1994;59:101–9. Slater R, Cantarella A, Gallella S, Worley A, Boyd S, Meek J, et al. Cortical pain responses in human infants. J Neurosci. 2006 Apr 5;26(14):3662–6. Bartocci M, Bergqvist LL, Lagercrantz H, Anand KJ. Pain activates cortical areas in the preterm newborn brain. Pain. 2006;122(1–2):109–17. Slater R, Worley A, Fabrizi L, Roberts S, Meek J, Boyd S, et al. Evoked potentials generated by noxious stimulation in the human infant brain. Eur J Pain. 2010;14(3):321–6. Slater R, Cornelissen L, Fabrizi L, Patten D, Yoxen J, Worley A, et al. Oral sucrose as an analgesic drug for procedural pain in newborn infants: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010/09/08 ed. 2010;376(9748):1225–32. Slater R, Fabrizi L, Worley A, Meek J, Boyd S, Fitzgerald M. Premature infants display increased noxious-evoked neuronal activity in the brain compared to healthy age-matched term-born infants. NeuroImage. 2010;52(2):583–9. Hartley C, Goksan S, Poorun R, Brotherhood K, Mellado GS, Moultrie F, et al. The relationship between nociceptive brain activity, spinal reflex withdrawal and behaviour in newborn infants. Sci Rep. 2015;31(5). Goksan S, Hartley C, Emery F, Cockrill N, Poorun R, Moultrie F, et al. fMRI reveals neural activity overlap between adult and infant pain. eLife. 2015;4. Aylward GP. Neurodevelopmental outcomes of infants born prematurely. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2005;26(6):427–40. Vohr BR, Wright LL, Dusick AM, Mele L, Verter J, Steichen JJ, et al. Neurodevelopmental and functional outcomes of extremely low birth weight infants in the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network, 1993–1994. Pediatrics. 2000;105(6):1216–26. Foster-Cohen S, Edgin JO, Champion PR, Woodward LJ. Early delayed language development in very preterm infants: evidence from the MacArthur-Bates CDI. J Child Lang. 2007;34(3):655–75. de Kieviet JF, Piek JP, Aarnoudse-Moens CS, Oosterlaan J. Motor development in very preterm and very low-birth-weight children from birth to adolescence: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2009;302(20):2235–42. Platt MJ, Cans C, Johnson A, Surman G, Topp M, Torrioli MG, et al. Trends in cerebral palsy among infants of very low birthweight (< 1500 g) or born prematurely (< 32 weeks) in 16 European centres: a database study. Lancet. 2007;369(9555):43–50. Aarnoudse-Moens CS, Weisglas-Kuperus N, van Goudoever JB, Oosterlaan J. Meta-analysis of neurobehavioral outcomes in very preterm and/or very low birth weight children. Pediatrics. 2009;124(2):717–28. Aarnoudse-Moens CS, Oosterlaan J, Duivenvoorden HJ, Van Goudoever JB, Weisglas-Kuperus N. Development of preschool and academic skills in children born very preterm. The Journal of Pediatrics. 2011;(158):51–6. Aarnoudse-Moens CS, Smidts DP, Oosterlaan J, Duivenvoorden HJ, Weisglas-Kuperus N. Executive function in very preterm children at early school age. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2009;37(7):981–93. Brummelte S, Grunau RE, Chau V, Poskitt KJ, Brant R, Vinall J, et al. Procedural pain and brain development in premature newborns. Ann Neurol. 2012;71(3):385–96. Smith GC, Gutovich J, Smyser C, Pineda R, Newnham C, Tjoeng TH, et al. Neonatal intensive care unit stress is associated with brain development in preterm infants. Ann Neurol. 2011 Oct;70(4):541–9. Carbajal R, Lenclen R, Jugie M, Paupe A, Barton BA, Anand KJ. Morphine does not provide adequate analgesia for acute procedural pain among preterm neonates. Pediatrics. 2005;115(6):1494–500. Taddio A, Lee C, Yip A, Parvez B, McNamara PJ, Shah V. Intravenous morphine and topical tetracaine for treatment of pain in neonates undergoing central line placement. JAMA. 2006;295(7):793–800. Bellieni C, Aloisi A, Ceccarelli D, Valenti M, Arrighi D, Muraca M, et al. Intramuscular injections in newborns: analgesic treatment and sex-linked response. J Maternal-Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013;26(4):419–22. Johnston C, Barrington KJ, Taddio A, Carbajal R, Filion F, Johnston leste, et al. Pain in Canadian NICUs: have we improved over the past 12 years? Clin J Pain. 2011;27(3):225–32. Stevens B, Yamada J, Ohlsson A, Haliburton S, Shorkey A. Sucrose for analgesia in newborn infants undergoing painful procedures. In: Yamada J, editor. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2016. p. CD001069. Bueno M, Yamada J, Harrison D, Khan S, Ohlsson A, Adams-Webber T, et al. A systematic review and meta-analyses of nonsucrose sweet solutions for pain relief in neonates. Pain Research and Management. 2013. Johnston C, Campbell-Yeo M, Fernandes A, Inglis D, Streiner D, Zee R. Skin-to-skin care for procedural pain in neonates (Full Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(1):CD008435. Pillai Riddell RR, Racine NM, Gennis HG, Turcotte K, Uman LS, Horton RE, et al. Non-pharmacological management of infant and young child procedural pain. In: Pillai Riddell RR, editor. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2011. p. CD006275. Abbott FV, Guy ER. Effects of morphine, pentobarbital and amphetamine on formalin-induced behaviours in infant rats: sedation versus specific suppression of pain. Pain. 1995;62(3):303–12. Campbell-Yeo M, Johnston C, Benoit B, Latimer M, Vincer M, Walker C-D, et al. Trial of Repeated Analgesia with Kangaroo Mother Care (TRAKC Trial). BMC Pediatr. 2013 Dec;9(1):182. 13(. Bellieni CV, Johnston CC. Analgesia, nil or placebo to babies, in trials that test new analgesic treatments for procedural pain. Acta Paediatr. 2016 Feb;105(2):129–36. Blass E, Shide D. Some comparisons among the calming and pain-relieving effects of sucrose, glucose, fructose, and lactose in infant rats. Chem Senses. 1994;19(3):239–49. Mouraux A, Iannetti G. The search for pain biomarkers in the human brain. Brain. 2018;141(12):3290–307. Slater R, Cornelissen L, Fabrizi L, Patten D, Yoxen J, Worley A, et al. Oral sucrose as an analgesic drug for procedural pain in newborn infants: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010/09/08 ed. 2010 Oct 9;376(9748):1225–32. Truini A, Panuccio G, Galeotti F, Maluccio MR, Sartucci F, Avoli M, et al. Laser-evoked potentials as a tool for assessing the efficacy of antinociceptive drugs. Eur J Pain. 2010 Feb;14(2):222–5. Stevens B, Yamada J, Dionne K, Lee G, Johnston C, Taddio A. The Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R). Clinical Journal of Pain. 2012. Gibbins S, Stevens B, Yamada J, Campbell-Yeo M. Validation of the PIPP-R. Archives of Pediatrics. 2012. Stevens B, Johnston C, Petryshen P, Taddio A. Premature Infant Pain Profile: development and initial validation. Clin J Pain. 1996 Mar;12(1):13–22. Grunau RV, Craig KD. Pain expression in neonates: facial action and cry. Pain. 1987;28(3):395–410. Campbell-Yeo ML, Johnston CC, Joseph KS, Feeley N, Chambers CT, Barrington KJ, et al. Cobedding and recovery time after heel lance in preterm twins: results of a randomized trial. Pediatrics. 2012;130(3):500–6. Campbell-Yeo M, Johnston C, Chambers C, Joseph K, Feeley N, Barrington K. Do preterm twins mount an empathic response when being near their co-twin undergoing a painful procedure? J Pain. 2014;15(4):31–1. Landis J, Koch G. An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics. 1977;33(2):363–74. Newborn, AA of PC on F and American Academy of Pediatrics. Policy Statement. Advanced Practice in Neonatal Nursing. Adv Neonatal Care. 2003;3(4):208–9. Gray J, Richardson D, McCormick M, Workman-Daniels K, Goldmann D. Neonatal therapeutic intervention scoring system: A therapy-based severity-of-illness index. Pediatrics. 1992;90(4):561–7. Richardson D, Corcoran J, Escobar G, Lee S. SNAP-II and SNAPPE-II: Simplified newborn illness severity and mortality risk scores. J Pediatr. 2001;138(1):92–100. Hartley C, Goksan S, Poorun R, Brotherhood K, Mellado GS, Moultrie F, et al. The relationship between nociceptive brain activity, spinal reflex withdrawal and behaviour in newborn infants. Sci Rep. 2015;5(July):12519. Obeidat HM, Shuriquie M. Effect of breast-feeding and maternal holding in relieving painful responses in full-term neonates. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2015;29(3):248–54. Efird J. Blocked randomization with randomly selected block sizes. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2011;8(1):15–20. Johnston C, Campbell-Yeo M, Fernandes A, Inglis D, Streiner D, Zee R. Skin-to-skin care for procedural pain in neonates. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jan;1:CD008435. Gramfort A, Luessi M, Larson E, Engemann D, Strohmeier D, Brodbeck C, et al. MNE software for processing MEG and EEG data. NeuroImage. 2014;86:446–60. Dien J. Applying Principal Components Analysis to Event-Related Potentials: A Tutorial. Dev Neuropsychol. 2012;37(6):497–517. Jones L, Laudiano-Dray MP, Whitehead K, Meek J, Fitzgerald M, Fabrizi L, et al. The impact of parental contact upon cortical noxious-related activity in human neonates. Eur J Pain. 2021;25(1):149–59. Fabrizi L, Worley a, Patten D, Holdridge S, Cornelissen L, Meek J, et al. Electrophysiological measurements and analysis of nociception in human infants. 2011;(December):1–5. Liaw J. Tactile stimulation and preterm infants. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2000;14(1):84–103. Feldman R, Eidelman A. Skin-to-skin contact (kangaroo care) accelerates autonomic and neurobehavioural maturation in preterm infants. Developmental Medicine. 2003. Harrison L, Olivet L, Cunningham K, Bodin M, Hicks C. Effects of gentle human touch on preterm infants: Pilot study results. Neonatal Netw. 1996;15(2):35–42. Harrison L, Leeper J, Yoon M. Effects of early parent touch on preterm infants’ heart rates and arterial oxygen saturation levels. J Adv Nurs. 1990;15(8):877–85. Field T. Preterm infant massage therapy studies: An American approach. Seminars in Neonataology. 2002;7(6):487–94. Field T, Diego M. Vagal activity, early growth and emotional development. Infant Behaviour and Development. 2008. Carden S, Hofer M. Independence of benzodiazepine and opiate action in the suppression of isolation distress in rat pups. Behav Neurosci. 1990;104(1):160–6. Nelson E, Panksepp J. Brain substrates of infant-mother attachment: Contributions of opioids, oxytocin, and norepinephrine. Neurosci Biobehavioural Reviews. 1998;22:437–52. Panksepp J, Nelson E, Siviy S. Brain opioids and mother-infant social motivation. Acta Paediatr. 1994;397:40–6. Panksepp J, Nelson E, Bekkedal M. Brain systems for the mediation of social separation-distress and social-reward. Evolutionary antecedents and neuropeptide intermediaries. Annals of the New York Academy of Science. 1997;807:78–100. Mancini F, Beaumont A, Hu L, Haggard P, Iannetti G. Touch inhibts subcortical and cortical nociceptive responses. Pain. 2015;156(10):1936–44. Campbell-Yeo M, Disher T, Benoit B, Johnston C. Understanding kangaroo care and its benefits to preterm infants. Pediatric Health, Medicine and Therapeutics. 2015 Mar 18;Volume 6:15. Conde-Agudelo A, Diaz-Rossello J. Kangaroo mother care to reduce morbidity and mortality in low birthweight infants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011/03/18 ed. 2014 Jan;(3):CD002771. Engler AJ, Ludington-Hoe SM, Cusson RM, Adams R, Bahnsen M, Brumbaugh E, et al. Kangaroo care: national survey of practice, knowledge, barriers, and perceptions. MCN: Am J Maternal Child Nurs. 2002;27(3):146–53. Johnston CC, Stevens B, Pinelli J, Gibbins S, Filion F, Jack A, et al. Kangaroo care is effective in diminishing pain response in preterm neonates. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003;157(11):1084–8. Moore ER, Anderson GC. Randomized controlled trial of very early mother-infant skin-to-skin contact and breastfeeding status. J Midwifery Women’s Health. 2007;52(2):116–24. Johnston C, Campbell-Yeo M, Fernandes A, Inglis D, Streiner D, Zee R. Skin-to-skin care for procedural pain in neonates. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2014 Jan;1(1):CD008435. Arditi H, Feldman R, Eidelman A. Effects of human contact and vagal regulation on pain reactivity and visual attention in newborns. Dev Psychobiol. 2006;48(7):561–73. Hofer M. Hidden regulators in attachment, separation, and loss. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. 1994;59:192–207. C KM,K, R H. J. W. Crying in separated and non-separated newborns: Sound spectrographic analysis. Acta Paediatr Int J Paediatrics. 1996;85(4):471–5. Mooncey S, Giannakoulopoulos X, Glover V, Acolet D. The effect of mother-infant skin-to-skin contact on plasma cortisol and endorphin concentrations in preterm newborns. Infant Behav Dev. 1997;20(4):553–7. Benoit B, Newman A, Martin-Misener R, Latimer M, Campbell-Yeo M. The influence of breastfeeding on cortical and bio-behavioural indicators of procedural pain in newborns: Findings of a randomized controlled trial. Early Hum Dev. 2021 Mar;154:105308. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Reviews received at journal 03 May, 2022 Reviewers invited by journal 25 Apr, 2022 Editor assigned by journal 25 Apr, 2022 First submitted to journal 31 Mar, 2022 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-1510675","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":101237018,"identity":"5e030543-0c0c-4590-9426-b2bdc167f1eb","order_by":0,"name":"Marsha Campbell-Yeo","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6645-2809","institution":"Dalhousie University","correspondingAuthor":true,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Marsha","middleName":"","lastName":"Campbell-Yeo","suffix":""},{"id":101237019,"identity":"972c0173-fd19-4574-afe5-ad026e0d6dbe","order_by":1,"name":"Britney Benoit","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"StFX: Saint Francis Xavier University","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Britney","middleName":"","lastName":"Benoit","suffix":""},{"id":101237020,"identity":"f0416597-b9be-499f-b5d4-3cca9d6610e5","order_by":2,"name":"Aaron Newman","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Dalhousie University","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Aaron","middleName":"","lastName":"Newman","suffix":""},{"id":101237021,"identity":"a080fc5d-cfb2-4b9f-8c2d-84fe5400f760","order_by":3,"name":"Celeste Johnson","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"McGill University","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Celeste","middleName":"","lastName":"Johnson","suffix":""},{"id":101237022,"identity":"d40f46fe-0f2f-4294-972d-1818e290a14a","order_by":4,"name":"Tim Bardouille","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Dalhousie University","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tim","middleName":"","lastName":"Bardouille","suffix":""},{"id":101237023,"identity":"d51460e7-7573-48a3-b7ea-4d6c5c57b590","order_by":5,"name":"Bonnie Stevens","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"SickKids: The Hospital for Sick Children","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Bonnie","middleName":"","lastName":"Stevens","suffix":""},{"id":101237024,"identity":"41843645-d391-421a-bc3c-1819b2a3f7c0","order_by":6,"name":"Arlene Jiang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Dalhousie University","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Arlene","middleName":"","lastName":"Jiang","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2022-03-31 19:19:59","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-1510675/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1510675/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":20896641,"identity":"d2d22a79-2e0a-4e85-8cce-9d63a613fb09","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2022-04-28 21:26:22","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":1414867,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"iCAPminiProtocolFigure1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-1510675/v1/3bc33e5a17af532c77500256.jpg"},{"id":20896642,"identity":"03fd44d1-ef42-40b1-9dbb-d2189956b265","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2022-04-28 21:26:25","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":850111,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-1510675/v1/833c3d62-c69f-433a-84b8-a0604f5b68d4.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"The influence of skin-to-skin contact on Cortical Activity during Painful procedures in preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit (iCAP mini): Study protocol for a randomized control trial.","fulltext":[{"header":"Background And Rationale {6a}","content":"\u003cp\u003eHumans in the last trimester of gestation are assumed to be in a pain free environment in the womb. However, one in every ten babies worldwide are born preterm and often spend weeks in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) where they will undergo numerous painful procedures as part of their routine care\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. A recent systematic review of epidemiological studies reported that preterm infants underwent a daily average of 12 painful procedures, with the majority receiving no interventions to alleviate pain\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. These findings are consistent with a Canadian survey carried out by members of this research team, which indicated that higher exposure to painful procedures and lack of pain relieving interventions were the most frequent in the youngest and sickest neonates\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. At one time it was believed that preterm infants did not experience pain, but two decades of behavioural observation studies\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, as well as recent studies using near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS)\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, electroencephalography (EEG)\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e to document cortical responses to noxious stimuli provides compelling evidence that infants as young as 25 weeks gestational age experience pain. In addition to immediate deleterious physiological effects and suffering, untreated early pain has been associated with long term consequences in children, including cognitive\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e and language deficits\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, motor delays\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, behavioural problems\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, and poor executive functioning\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. In addition to outcomes assessed through standardized measures, imaging studies have demonstrated decreased frontal and parietal brain width\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, and altered diffusion measures and functional connectivity in the temporal lobes\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e of infants highly exposed to pain.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSweet tasting solutions and non-pharmacological pain management in the NICU\u003c/strong\u003e. While pharmacological interventions may appear to be a logical solution to minimize pain, they can be inadequate, unavailable, or impractical for the most common procedures such as heel lance, venipuncture, intravenous insertion, or intramuscular injection\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. This is of significant concern, as together these procedures make up 94% of tissue-breaking painful exposures experienced by infants in hospital\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. As such, we and others have examined the effectiveness of alternative interventions such as sweet tasting solutions (sucrose\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e or glucose\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e) and non-pharmacological strategies (skin-to-skin contact\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (SSC), often referred to as kangaroo care, which is the upright ventral holding of a diaper clad baby on the bare chest of a mother or alternate care provider), non-nutritive sucking (pacifier)\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, or swaddling (bundling in a blanket)\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e to reduce neonatal pain response. There is now strong evidence from Cochrane and other systematic reviews that, based on bio-behavioural measures (physiological, facial, or body responses), oral sucrose\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e and non-sucrose sweet tasting solutions\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, as well as SSC\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, are the most effective methods to reduce pain associated with commonly performed needle-related and tissue-breaking procedures in preterm infants in the NICU. Despite this evidence, there remains little understanding of the effect of these interventions on nociceptive (i.e., pain-related) responses in the neonatal brain. Specifically, whether interventions used in clinical practice lead to modulation or blunting of noxious pain-related brain responses, or solely depresses the expression of behavioural responses (e.g., facial actions). A recent systematic review including 74 human studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7049)\u003csup\u003e33\u003c/sup\u003e has shown that intra-oral sucrose (currently considered standard of care for hospitalized infants) effectively reduces bio-behavioural responses of preterm infants undergoing procedural pain. Although widely practiced, there is some evidence that brings the analgesic efficacy of sucrose into question. In one study by Slater\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, reported in the Lancet, sucrose decreased bio-behavioural pain scores in infants undergoing heel lance when compared to a no treatment control, however, sucrose did not significantly reduce the amplitude of a Noxious-related event-related potential measured using EEG, suggesting that its effects may be sedative in nature rather than analgesic\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. These findings support concerns raised by Abbott and Guy\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, who demonstrated using a rat pup model that while behavioural response to pain was similar between rats that were administered morphine and pentobarbital, only morphine blunted the nociceptive pain specific response, demonstrating the difficulty in discerning between sedation and analgesia using solely bio-behavioural measures.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eObjectives {7}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe \u003cstrong\u003eprimary objective\u003c/strong\u003e of this study is to characterize the effect of SSC condition compared to 24% oral sucrose on noxious-evoked brain activity in the preterm infant brain during a clinically required heel lance procedure\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSecondary objectives\u003c/strong\u003e are to determine: a) differentiation between bio-behavioural pain response and noxious-related brain activity elicited by clinical heel lance; b) frequency of adverse events between interventions across groups; and c) maternal acceptability of study participation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHypotheses\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePrimary\u003c/strong\u003e: \u003c/strong\u003eInfants randomized to the SSC condition, when compared to infants randomized to the 24% oral sucrose condition, will demonstrate a lower amplitude pain-specific event related potential during a clinical (heel lance) noxious stimulus. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSecondary\u003c/strong\u003e: Infants randomized to the SSC condition, when compared to infants randomized to the 24% oral sucrose, will demonstrate: a) less differentiation between bio-behavioural pain response and noxious-evoked pain activity elicited by clinical (heel lance) noxious stimulus; and b) fewer adverse events (i.e., episodes of choking, apnea, bradycardia, temperature instability, need for repeat heel lance or \u0026ldquo;rescue sucrose\u0026rdquo; doses).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTrial design {8}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA single centre, single blind, parallel randomized controlled two arm trial design, similar to our previous studies in this population,\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e will be utilized. Infants will be randomized to i) SSC; or ii) 24% oral sucrose where they will undergo a clinically required heel lance. All aspects of the study will undergo institutional ethical approval. No infant will undergo pain associated with a heel lance procedure without intervention as per recent recommendations\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods: Participants, Interventions, And Outcomes","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy setting {9}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study will be conducted in the NICU of the IWK Health in Halifax, Nova Scotia, a 40-bed tertiary level referral unit.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEligibility criteria {10}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInfants considered to be medically stable, whose parents have provided informed consent, and require a clinically indicated heel lance, will be recruited to participate. Infants delivered between 32 and 36 completed weeks gestational age (GA) at birth admitted to NICU whose parents can read and write English will be approached for inclusion within the first seven days of age. Determination of stability will be made in consultation with the attending neonatal staff. Exclusion criteria are major congenital anomalies, received or receiving opioids in previous 24 hours, immediate post-op surgical period (\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;72 hours), history of hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy requiring cooling, and contraindication for sucrose administration (e.g., unable to swallow, paralysis) due to safety concerns or inability to assess pain accurately.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWho will take informed consent? {26a}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConsent for the research team to approach potentially eligible participants will be facilitated by the clinical team. A research nurse will determine eligibility, provide study information, and obtain signed informed consent.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAdditional consent provisions for collection and use of participant data and biological specimens {26b}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eN/A: No biological specimens were collected as part of this trial.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInterventions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eExplanation for the choice of comparators {6b}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCurrently, the provision of 24% sucrose prior to a heel lance is considered standard of care and will be used as a comparator to SSC.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e24% Sucrose (0.1 ml) will be delivered by a research nurse experienced in NICU care, onto the anterior surface of the tongue, commencing two minutes prior to data collection, doses may be repeated every two minutes throughout the painful procedure as deemed necessary by the clinical care provider\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The only modification to usual practice will be to position the infant to ensure optimal data readings from the EEG net and to visualize their face on the video recording, to enable scoring of pain responses\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIntervention description {11a}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIntervention Arm\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInfants allocated to the SSC arm will be placed in upright, ventral SSC with their mother at least 15 minutes prior to data collection.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCriteria for discontinuing or modifying allocated interventions {11b}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt is unlikely that there will be a need to modify the allocation intervention. However, parents may choose to withdraw their infant from the study for any reason at any time.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStrategies to improve adherence to interventions {11c}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEvery effort will be made to ensure fidelity of the intervention. Any deviation will be documented using an intervention fidelity checklist completed by the research nurse at the end of the procedure. Any need for additional (e.g., rescue) pain management strategies will be monitored and compared monthly across groups.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRelevant concomitant care permitted or prohibited during the trial {11d}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNo other changes in clinical care will occur outside the study interventions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eProvisions for post-trial care {30}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eN/A: There is no post-trial care in this trial.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOutcomes {12}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNoxious-related brain activity\u003c/strong\u003e will be measured from a pain-related event-related potential\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e induced by a clinically required heel lance measured using a dense-array neonatal EEG recording. The primary outcome attributed to the clinically required heel lance will be a noxious-related N420-P560 event-related potential (ERP). This site corresponds to E19 on the 32 channel HydroCel Geodesic Sensor Net at electrode Pz, which will specifically be examined and isolated as previous research has reported pain-related activity at this site in both neonates\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e and adults\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The EEG data will be recorded using a 32 channel HydroCel Geodesic Sensor Net connected to a GES 400 EEG system (EGI, Eugene, OR, USA). Electrodes will be submerged for five minutes in a solution of warm water and infant shampoo. Electrode impendences will be checked to ensure they are below the impedance threshold of 100 kΩ. NetStation Acquisition software (version 5.2.0.2) will be used for recording of EEG activity from 0.5 to 30 Hz with a sampling rate of 1000 samples per second and a conversion of 24 bit. For all infants, regardless of randomization, data collection will begin with a continuous recording of a one-minute baseline of all outcome measures while the infant is resting in their incubator or cot (BL1). Following this, a non-noxious (NN1) control stimulus will be applied to the infant\u0026rsquo;s foot to capture a baseline response on EEG to a non-painful event. This non-noxious (sham) stimulus will consist of placing the heel lance against the foot and rotating it 90 degrees, so that when the lance is released it mimics the sensation of the heel lance procedure without the associated tissue-breaking and pain. The infant will then be placed in their assigned intervention group and will be re-exposed to the non-noxious control stimulus, followed by the clinical heel lance. The method for time locking the non-noxious stimulus and noxious heel lance to the EEG recording in this study involves the use of audio-recording equipment to time-lock based on the audible spring-blade release of the heel lance. During both events, the lancet will be released. The sound of the heel lance release will be captured using a lapel microphone held by the research coordinator close to the infant\u0026rsquo;s foot, amplified through an USB audio interface (M-Audio Fast Track, M-Audio Inc., Cumberland, Rhode Island, USA), and linked to the EEG amplifier using an EGI Audio-Visual (AV) device through an AV device DIN adaptor and hypergrip cable (EGI, Eugene, Oregon, USA). This apparatus ensures that the sound associated with heel lance release is marked with millisecond precision on the continuous EEG recording. To test the accuracy of this time-locking method and ensure there is no latency through the audio-computer interface, the microphone input line and audio output line were connected to a digital oscilloscope and relative timing of the activity on both lines were observed during microphone activation. There was no appreciable latency between input and output, indicating a precise time-locking mechanism to isolate a pain-specific ERP.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePain intensity\u003c/strong\u003e will be assessed using the Premature Infant Pain Profile - Revised (PIPP-R)\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The original PIPP was developed by Stevens et al. in 1996\u003csup\u003e46\u003c/sup\u003e and revised in 2012\u003csup\u003e44\u003c/sup\u003e. The PIPP includes two physiological (heart rate, oxygen saturation), three behavioural (brow bulge, eye squeeze, nasolabial furrow), and two contextual (GA, behavioural state [BS]) variables known to modify pain responses. Each variable is scored on a four-point scale (0, 1, 2, 3) reflecting changes in magnitude from baseline values. GA and BS are reverse-scored to account for developmental and state differences in preterm and term infants abilities to respond to pain\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. In the PIPP-R, the original seven variables of the PIPP are retained, but ordering and scoring of GA and BS has changed to ensure baseline characteristics prior to the painful event do not artificially inflate scores. The PIPP-R has demonstrated construct validation in infants of varying GAs during extreme group comparisons\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. As facial actions are the most specific bio-behavioural indicator of acute procedural pain in newborn infants\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, the three individual facial actions within the PIPP-R will be analyzed separately in addition to the composite PIPP-R score. Physiologic and behavioural data collection techniques, which have been developed and used extensively by this research team over the past decade, will be employed\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. For physiologic variables, heart rate and oxygen saturation will be measured continuously throughout the procedure via a pulse oximeter placed on the infant\u0026rsquo;s hand and recorded on the GES 400 EEG System 400 Physio 16 II. Behavioural state will be observed for 30 seconds prior to the noxious stimulus from video, and GA will be determined from the medical record. Time locking of the noxious-evoked stimulus and heel lance will be synchronized with EEG recordings, physiological data, and behavioural data using the time trigger device described previously. Electronic event markers will be used to synchronize all physiological and behavioural data, and to indicate four distinct phases of the standardized heel lance: i) baseline data collection for two minutes; ii) two minutes during and following sucrose administration; iii) heel lance; and iv) return to baseline for two minutes. Pain intensity will be calculated by trained coders, blinded to the study purpose and design, using newly developed facial coding software (Pain Assessment in Neonates, [PAiN]) developed recently by the Principal Investigator (PI) for previous research\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Inter-rater reliability of greater than 0.8\u003csup\u003e50\u003c/sup\u003e with the trained coders for the PIPP-R scores will be established prior to data collection and monitored throughout the study using a random selection of infants after 20 infants are entered into the study. See Fig. 1 for overview of data collection procedures.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAdverse events and safety monitoring.\u003c/strong\u003e As the HydroCel Geodesic Sensor Net requires that electrode sponges are soaked in a warm saline solution prior to application to the infant scalp, a thermal cap will be placed over the sensor net during data collection to reduce heat loss. Infant axillary temperature will be monitored every 15 minutes throughout data collection to ensure normothermia (36.5 to 37.5 degrees centigrade). Infants will be monitored constantly during data collection (observation and continuous cardiorespiratory and oxygen saturation recording) in order to prevent any risk of skin irritation while wearing the HydroCel Geodesic Sensor Net as well any incidence of choking, apnea (defined as unexplained cessation of breathing for 20 seconds or longer, or a shorter respiratory pause associated with bradycardia, cyanosis, pallor, and/or hypotonia\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e), or bradycardia (defined as a 30 beat per minute drop from baseline, or when the heart rate is below 100 beats per minute). Adverse events, need for a repeat heel lance to allow for sufficient blood collection, or administration of additional doses of \u0026ldquo;rescue\u0026rdquo; sucrose will also be recorded on the tolerance/adverse events section of the intervention fidelity checklist, which has been developed and validated in previous research by the PI\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDemographic and background clinical data\u003c/strong\u003e characterizing the sample that will be collected from maternal and infant hospital charts will include: maternal age, maternal parity, maternal experience providing skin-to-skin contact to previous children, maternal medications, history of maternal diabetes during pregnancy, infant GA at birth, infant postnatal age at time of study participation, mode of delivery, infant birth weight, infant Apgar scores, infant sex, total number of previous painful procedures, primary diagnoses, severity of illness (Neonatal Therapeutic Interventions Scoring System [NTISS]\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, Score for Neonatal Acute Physiology-II [SNAP II]\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, and whether the infant has a history of receiving opioids.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eParticipant timeline {13}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e[Figure 1]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSample size {14}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eUsing a priori data\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, we will require 63 participants per group (total sample size of 126 for the two groups) to detect a 30% reduction in amplitude of the pain-specific ERP on EEG during the clinically required heel lance. The sample size calculation accounts for multiple testing across intervention groups, and is based on a type I error probability of 5%, and power of 80%\u003csup\u003e54\u003c/sup\u003e. Sixty-three participants per group also allows us to detect the smallest clinically important difference of one on the PIPP-R scale, with a standard deviation of two, considered a clinically relevant difference between the active interventions of SSC and 24% oral sucrose\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e55\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRecruitment {15}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRecruitment is ongoing with expected enrollment of, on average, four participants monthly.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAssignment of interventions: Allocation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSequence generation {16a}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants will be randomized to groups using a password-protected REDCap database randomization tool. Sequence generation will be conducted using a computer-generated random number list know only to a consultant statistician not associated with the study and made available through the online portal. Randomization will be block-stratified by age (32 to \u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;34 weeks versus \u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;or equal to 34 week to 36 completed weeks GA) to ensure the intervention groups are balanced with respect to GA. Intervention allocation concealment will be achieved by using randomly permuted blocks of two, four, and six\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e to minimize risk of allocation bias.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConcealment mechanism {16b}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAllocation will be made available only at the time of randomization when the research personnel access the online portal. Intervention allocation concealment will be achieved by using randomly permuted blocks of two, four, and six\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e to minimize risk of allocation bias, unknown to the research team.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eImplementation {16c}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFollowing consent and prior to the medically indicated procedure, the research nurse will randomize the infant to obtain the study intervention allocation from the online portal. Once provided the information from the site, the research nurse will inform mothers of their study arm allocation and facilitate the timing of each infants\u0026rsquo; clinically required heel lance with the clinical team.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAssignment of interventions: Blinding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWho will be blinded {17a}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn keeping with clinical trials where interventions cannot be blinded, we will ensure that data will be collected independently from those conducting analysis (blinded to group allocation) to minimize bias. Mothers, staff, and research nurses and assistants completing data collection will not be blinded to whether the infant has been randomly assigned to SSC condition or the 24% oral sucrose condition. All individuals carrying out data analysis will be blinded to group assignment. Additionally, EEG data analysts will have no prior knowledge of study groups and assignment. Close up video of the infants face during the painful procedure with no sound will be recorded to ensure that coders will be blinded to all aspects of group allocation and study purpose.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eProcedure for unblinding if needed {17b}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt is not anticipated that there will be a need to unblind the data prior to analyses.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData collection and management\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePlans for assessment and collection of outcomes {18a}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSet-up of EEG equipment, video recording, and physiological monitoring is anticipated to take 20\u0026ndash;30 minutes. Baseline measurements (BL1 and BL2, two minutes each), stabilization in SSC after transfer (15 minutes), and heel lance procedure (three to five minutes) is estimated to take 20\u0026ndash;25 minutes for a total data collection period of 40\u0026ndash;60 minutes. Infants will be followed until completion of a regularly scheduled heel lance procedure.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePlans to promote participant retention and complete follow-up {18b}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFollow-up is completed within minutes of finishing the procedure; therefore, it is unlikely there will be missing data due to loss to follow-up.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData management {19}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCollection of both bio-behavioural data and pain-specific ERPs on EEG have been previously demonstrated in clinical trials with this patient population\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. A challenge that may be encountered during data collection is loss of physiologic data (e.g., heart rate and electrophysiologic measurements) due to equipment failure or movement artifact. EEG procedures will be employed to control for and limit loss due to artifact. Research personnel experienced in EEG techniques will be present during data collection to monitor data recordings and make prompt adjustments in the instance of any recording malfunctions to limit data loss.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConfidentiality {27}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStudy participants will not be identified in any reports or publications of this research. Participant study data and videotapes will be kept in a locked file cabinet in a locked office at IWK Health. All data will have participant names removed and identified only by a code. The code will be kept in a locked file cabinet in a locked office at IWK Health. Study records will be kept for a minimum of 10 years. Only the staff involved in the research will see them. Members of the IWK Research Ethics Audit Committee or delegates of the Nova Scotia Health Research Foundation may look at the records to ensure the study is being conducted properly.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePlans for collection, laboratory evaluation and storage of biological specimens for genetic or molecular analysis in this trial/future use {33}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eN/A: No biological specimens were collected as part of this trial.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStatistical methods\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStatistical methods for primary and secondary outcomes {20a}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDescriptive statistics will be used to summarize baseline characteristics using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, IBM Corporation, Armonk, New York, USA). Student t tests and chi-square tests will be used, as appropriate, to assess potential differences across intervention groups at baseline.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNoxious-related brain activity.\u003c/strong\u003e Data from the EEG recordings will be processed and statistically analyzed using the MNE (v. 0.24.0)\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e58\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, and the event-related potential (ERP) Principal Component Analysis (PCA) Toolkit (v. 2.76)\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e59\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e in MATLAB (MathWorks Inc., Natick, Massachusetts, USA). For artifact detection and correction, a copy of the continuous EEG data will be bandpass filtered using MNE from 1\u0026ndash;30 Hz using a zero-phase finite impulse response filter with a hamming window. This raw, continuous EEG data will be segmented into epochs time-locked to the event markers of experimental interest (including noxious and non-noxious stimuli), ranging from 500 ms prior to each event marker to 1000 ms after, with each segment normalized by subtracting the mean amplitude value over the segment from each time point (effectively centering each segment at 0 \u0026micro;V). Epochs will be excluded if they contain movement artifacts on electrode E19, an area associated with pain-related activity in both infants\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e and adults\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Any epochs containing peak-to-peak signal amplitudes exceeding 150 \u0026micro;V will be considered contaminated with movement artifacts\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The data reduction technique of x (PCA\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e59\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e will be applied to the data at electrode Pz to identify mathematically independent components of the waveform. The resulting principal components (PCs) represent systematic variation in the amplitude of the EEG signal at different time points across the EEG tracing. The latency and amplitude of the generated principal components will be examined and the PC corresponding to a N420-P560 will be retained for subsequent phases of the analysis. Four principal components will be examined: two PCs for the SSC group (PC for non-noxious control stimulus, PC for noxious heel lance) and two PCs for the sucrose group (PC for non-noxious control stimulus, PC for noxious heel lance). Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test will be run to assess the effect of stimulation type (non-noxious control stimulus, noxious heel lance) and treatment (SSC and sucrose) on the peak amplitude of the principal components. With this analysis, it is possible to assess if 1) exposure to heel lance produces a pain-specific component and 2) if the magnitude of this component varies between intervention groups\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. If there are identified differences between groups in any potential confounding variables (i.e., prior pain exposure, infant sex) analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) will be utilized to adjust for the potential effect of these covariates.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePain intensity.\u003c/strong\u003e An overall between-group comparison of the PIPP-R scores will be performed using an ANCOVA, where the covariate will be the GA stratification variable. If the overall comparison is significant at the 5% level, then the paired comparisons will be performed using a similar ANCOVA model. An appropriate multiple comparison Bonferroni procedure will be used to control the overall type I error probability. To conduct the subgroup analysis for GA, an interaction term will be added to the ANCOVA model. In each trial the binary adverse events variables will be compared using a multiple logistic model with intervention group and GA as independent variables. To control for multiplicity due to the number safety variables, a 5% significance will be used.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAdverse events\u003c/strong\u003e. Mean frequency of occurrence of each of the safety surveillance outcomes will be compared across the groups using t-tests, with post-hoc tests for intervention condition as appropriate.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInterim analyses {21b}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOne analysis of the primary outcome is planned at study end. There are no plans for an interim analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethods for additional analyses (e.g. subgroup analyses) {20b}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA subgroup analysis based on GA will be conducted.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethods in analysis to handle protocol non-adherence and any statistical methods to handle missing data {20c}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt is not anticipated that there will be an issue with protocol non-adherence given that data are collected over a single intervention and that participants are infants.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePlans to give access to the full protocol, participant level-data, and statistical code {31c}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe protocol will be freely available through an open access publication. There are no plans to have participant-level dataset, and statistical code readily available, however, individual requests will be considered.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOversight and monitoring\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComposition of the coordinating centre and trial steering committee {5d}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe PI will be responsible for the overall program of research. A 0.5 FTE Research Coordinator will be hired for the day-to-day management of the trial including study personnel, under the supervision of the PI.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe PI, Co-I\u0026rsquo;s, and Research Coordinator will comprise the RCT Steering Committee. The Steering Committee will meet bi-monthly in year one, quarterly thereafter in person and via teleconference, and at the end of the study to discuss results and dissemination.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComposition of the data monitoring committee, its role and reporting structure {21a}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA data safety monitoring committee (DSMC) will be established consisting of three individuals (with expertise in neonatology, neuroscience, or biostatistics), independent of the investigators who have no financial, scientific, or other conflicts of interest with the trial.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAdverse event reporting and harms {22}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe collection, assessment, and reporting of adverse events and other unintended effects of trial interventions or trial conduct will be done in accordance with Good Clinical Guideline Practices and Research Ethics Board (REB) approvals.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFrequency and plans for auditing trial conduct {23}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll study documents will be kept in accordance with Good Clinical Guideline Practices and REB approvals. There are no planned audits, however, institutional auditing of clinical trials independent from investigators occur routinely.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePlans for communicating important protocol amendments to relevant parties (e.g. trial participants, ethical committees) {25}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIf any important protocol modifications (e.g., changes to eligibility criteria, outcomes, analyses) are required, communication of these changes will made through online portals (i.e., ethics, clincialtrials.gov.), or email reports will be forwarded to relevant parties (e.g., investigators, REB, trial participants, trial registries, journals, regulators).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDissemination plans {31a}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKnowledge translation initiatives will be ongoing throughout the research process, with initial emphasis on raising healthcare professional and public awareness and interest in newborn pain management followed by increased knowledge and changing behaviours through updating of relevant policies and practices. Regular updates on the progress of the study will be provided to health professionals and managers on the participating unit via face-to-face meetings. When results from the study become available, focus will also be placed on targeting researchers, healthcare providers, administrators, and decision makers with new knowledge to inform newborn pain assessment and management practices, as well as subsequent research in the field. Three reports (1, 3, and 10 pages) will be generated for key clinical and policy stakeholders to disseminate the findings of the study. These reports will be disseminated nationally and internationally through existing affiliations with the Canadian Neonatal Network, Canadian Association of Pediatric Health Centres, Canadian Pediatric Society, both Canadian and International councils of Neonatal Nurses, Vermont Oxford Neonatal Network, and Nordic Pain in Early Life Association. Traditional end of grant knowledge translation initiatives targeting researchers and knowledge users will include publication in high impact academic peer-reviewed journals (e.g., Pediatrics, JAMA Pediatrics, PAIN, Birth), presentation at national and international conferences (e.g., International Symposium on Pediatric Pain, Canadian Pain Society Annual Scientific Meeting, Pediatric Academic Society, Council of International Neonatal Nurses), and presentations and webinars to key clinical decision makers and healthcare providers in the clinical setting locally and worldwide (e.g., Family Centered Care Council, National Canadian Premature Baby Association and March of Dimes). Our team has a strong online presence and will share study results as appropriate over social media platforms including Facebook and Twitter, as well as press releases to raise widespread public, healthcare provider, and parent awareness. Collectively, our team has contributed to practice change in our local institutions and worldwide through clinical practice guidelines. The PI and several members of the team regularly give public presentations (e.g., CIHR Caf\u0026eacute; Scientifique) and disseminate research findings through print, radio, and television media. A YouTube video produced by the PI for parents to reduce pain in newborns has been viewed\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;165,000 times in \u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;152 countries and was awarded first place in the inaugural CIHR Video Talks Competition. Moreover, the Centre for Pediatric Pain Research (CPPR), where the PI is based, has successfully reached millions of parents and care providers through the CIHR funded \u0026ldquo;It Doesn\u0026rsquo;t Have to Hurt\u0026rdquo; initiative in partnership with YummyMummyClub.ca to improve pain care for children.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eTo the best of our knowledge, we will be the first sufficiently powered randomized clinical trial examining the effect of SSC provided during a medically indicated heel lance on pain induced activity in the preterm brain compared to the provision of 24% sucrose.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eWhy might maternal infant skin-to-skin contact (SSC) be different?\u003c/b\u003e Tactile perception is one of the first senses of fetal development, emerging at approximately seven to eight weeks gestation\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Thus, all newborns have the ability to perceive physical touch and demonstrate positive responses to stroking or massage\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e63\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Human infants have been shown to demonstrate reduced behavioural stress and improved sleep following gentle human touch\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e64\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e and massage\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e66\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e67\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Additionally, animal models of neonatal touch have demonstrated increases in endorphins, oxytocin, and serotonin \u0026ndash; hormones that have been associated with modulating pain response\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR69 CR70\" citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e68\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e71\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. While no studies to date have examined the neural mechanisms underlying the analgesic effect of touch on pain responses in infants, there is evidence to suggest that simple touch modulates nociceptive specific responses in adults\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e72\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. When A delta and C nociceptors were selectively activated by high power laser pulses in healthy adults, application of tactile stimulation significantly reduced cortical laser-evoked potentials\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e72\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e and laser blink reflex (which is generated by brain stem circuits before nociceptive signals reach the cortex)\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e72\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. This suggests a blunting of both cortical and sub-cortical nociceptive responses secondary to tactile stimulation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvidence related to SSC demonstrates significant benefit such as stabilization of physiologic parameters (e.g., temperature, heart, and respiratory rates), decreased occurrence of apneas, improved weight gain and growth, and accelerated maturation of autonomic and circadian systems\u003csup\u003e63,73\u0026minus;77\u003c/sup\u003e. Related to this proposal, SSC has demonstrated benefit as an effective pain-relieving intervention for infants undergoing needle-related procedural pain\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR78\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e78\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. In a recent update of our Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis, including 25 studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2001 infants), SSC significantly reduced composite pain scores measured by the PIPP\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e at 30 (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;268, MD -3.21, 95% CI -3.94 to -2.48), 60 (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;164, MD -1.85, 95% CI -3.03 to -0.68), and 90 (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;163, MD -1.34, 95% CI -2.56 to -0.13) seconds following painful procedures. Of note, while holding a clothed baby provides some comfort, it appears that direct SSC is significantly more effective\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e79\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The underlying mechanisms of SSC are thought to be associated with blunting of sympathetic nervous system responses and up-regulation of parasympathetic nervous system responses through physiological neural regulators\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e80\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Specifically, SSC may elicit an inborn tactile receptor response that regulates vagal tone and release of endogenous opiates, oxytocin, and beta-endorphins\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR81\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e81\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR82\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e82\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. This proposed mechanism of action differs significantly from the primary gustatory mechanism of sweet tasting solutions. As such, it is highly plausible that SSC may inhibit nociceptive responses in the preterm brain\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e83\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec2\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSummary and Justification for the Proposed Research\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile there is strong evidence of the effectiveness of oral sucrose and SSC to reduce bio-behavioral responses to pain, based on the current standard of assessment, optimal pain management in the NICU is precluded by our lack of understanding of the effect of these interventions on a) noxious pain-related responses in the neonatal brain, (b) the efficacy of SSC when compared to sucrose on noxious pain-related brain activity, and (c) the relationship between noxious-evoked brain activity and bio-behavioural responses to noxious stimuli in preterm infants. The proposed research study will address these significant gaps. The results of the study may help increase awareness and inform behaviour change and practice regarding the importance of parent presence and engagement in pain care in the NICU.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eTrial Status\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe trial is currently in the recruitment phase. Recruitment began on November 19, 2018 and is estimated to be completed on September 30, 2022. Protocol Version 1.0 (23OCT2018).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cp\u003eANOVA - Analysis of Variance\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eANCOVA - Analysis of Covariance\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBS - Behavioural State\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCPPR - Centre for Pediatric Pain Research\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDSMC - Data Safety Monitoring Committee\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEEG - Electroencephalography\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eERP - Event-Related Potential\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003efMRI - Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGA - Gestational Age\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eiCAP mini - The influence of skin-to-skin contact on Cortical Activity during Painful procedures in preterm infants\u0026nbsp;in the neonatal intensive care unit\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003emN - Millinewtons\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNTISS - Neonatal Therapeutic Interventions Scoring System\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNICU - Neonatal Intensive Care Unit\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNIRS - Near Infrared Spectroscopy\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePAiN - Pain Assessment in Neonates\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePCA \u0026ndash; Principal Component Analysis\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePCs - Principal Components\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePI - Principal Investigator\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePIPP - Premature Infant Pain Profile\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePIPP-R - Premature Infant Pain Profile Revised\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eREB\u0026nbsp;- Research Ethics Board\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSNAP II - Score for Neonatal Acute Physiology-II\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSSC - Skin-To-Skin Contact\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors\u0026rsquo; contributions {\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e31b}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMC-Y is the Principal Investigator; she conceived the study, led the proposal and protocol development. MC-Y oversaw all aspects of the conduct of the study. BB contributed to study design. BB, AN, TB and AJ provided expertise regarding EEG procedures, data handling, and analysis procedures. BS and CJ provided expertise related to infant pain and bio-behavioural pain assessment. All authors contributed to development of the proposal and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e{4}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNova Scotia Health Research Foundation, Project #1023060\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e{29}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe Principal Investigator and study team will have access to the final trial dataset.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e{24}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIWK Health Ethical Review and approval #1023060. Written, informed consent to participate will be obtained from all participants.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e{32}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConsent form available as supplementary materials.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e{28}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWeb links and URLs:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe Mom-Linc Lab http://momlinc.ca\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAnand KS. New perspectives on the definition of pain. Pain. 1996;67:3\u0026ndash;6.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnston CC, Collinge JM, Henderson SJ, Anand KJ. A cross-sectional survey of pain and pharmacological analgesia in Canadian neonatal intensive care units. Clin J Pain. 1997 Dec;13(4):308\u0026ndash;12.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarker DP, Rutter N. Exposure to invasive procedures in neonatal intensive care unit admissions. Arch Dis Child. 1995;72:47\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSimons SH, van Dijk M, Anand KS, Roofthooft D, van Lingen RA, Tibboel D. Do we still hurt newborn babies? A prospective study of procedural pain and analgesia in neonates. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003;157(11):1058\u0026ndash;64.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStevens B, McGrath P, Gibbins S, Beyene J, Breau L, Camfield C, et al. Procedural pain in newborns at risk for neurologic impairment. Pain. 2003;105(1\u0026ndash;2):27\u0026ndash;35.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCruz MD, Fernandes AM, Oliveira CR. Epidemiology of painful procedures performed in neonates: A systematic review of observational studies. Eur J Pain. 2016 Apr;20(4):489\u0026ndash;98.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnston CC, Filion F, Campbell-Yeo M, Goulet C, Bell L, McNaughton K, et al. Kangaroo mother care diminishes pain from heel lance in very preterm neonates: A crossover trial. BMC Pediatr. 2008 Dec;24(1):13. 8(.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGrunau RV, Low MD. Cognitive and task-related EEG correlates of arithmetic performance in adolescents. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1987;9(5):563\u0026ndash;74.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnston CC, Stevens BJ, Yang F, Horton L. Differential response to pain by very premature neonates. Pain. 1995;61(3):471\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStevens B, Johnston C. Physiologic responses of premature infants to a painful stimulus. Nurs Res. 1994;43:226\u0026ndash;31.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStevens B, Johnston C, Horton L. Factors that influence the behavioural pain responses of premature infants. Pain. 1994;59:101\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSlater R, Cantarella A, Gallella S, Worley A, Boyd S, Meek J, et al. Cortical pain responses in human infants. J Neurosci. 2006 Apr 5;26(14):3662\u0026ndash;6.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBartocci M, Bergqvist LL, Lagercrantz H, Anand KJ. Pain activates cortical areas in the preterm newborn brain. Pain. 2006;122(1\u0026ndash;2):109\u0026ndash;17.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSlater R, Worley A, Fabrizi L, Roberts S, Meek J, Boyd S, et al. Evoked potentials generated by noxious stimulation in the human infant brain. Eur J Pain. 2010;14(3):321\u0026ndash;6.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSlater R, Cornelissen L, Fabrizi L, Patten D, Yoxen J, Worley A, et al. Oral sucrose as an analgesic drug for procedural pain in newborn infants: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010/09/08 ed. 2010;376(9748):1225\u0026ndash;32.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSlater R, Fabrizi L, Worley A, Meek J, Boyd S, Fitzgerald M. Premature infants display increased noxious-evoked neuronal activity in the brain compared to healthy age-matched term-born infants. NeuroImage. 2010;52(2):583\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHartley C, Goksan S, Poorun R, Brotherhood K, Mellado GS, Moultrie F, et al. The relationship between nociceptive brain activity, spinal reflex withdrawal and behaviour in newborn infants. Sci Rep. 2015;31(5).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGoksan S, Hartley C, Emery F, Cockrill N, Poorun R, Moultrie F, et al. fMRI reveals neural activity overlap between adult and infant pain. eLife. 2015;4.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAylward GP. Neurodevelopmental outcomes of infants born prematurely. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2005;26(6):427\u0026ndash;40.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVohr BR, Wright LL, Dusick AM, Mele L, Verter J, Steichen JJ, et al. Neurodevelopmental and functional outcomes of extremely low birth weight infants in the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network, 1993\u0026ndash;1994. Pediatrics. 2000;105(6):1216\u0026ndash;26.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFoster-Cohen S, Edgin JO, Champion PR, Woodward LJ. Early delayed language development in very preterm infants: evidence from the MacArthur-Bates CDI. J Child Lang. 2007;34(3):655\u0026ndash;75.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ede Kieviet JF, Piek JP, Aarnoudse-Moens CS, Oosterlaan J. Motor development in very preterm and very low-birth-weight children from birth to adolescence: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2009;302(20):2235\u0026ndash;42.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePlatt MJ, Cans C, Johnson A, Surman G, Topp M, Torrioli MG, et al. Trends in cerebral palsy among infants of very low birthweight (\u0026lt; 1500 g) or born prematurely (\u0026lt; 32 weeks) in 16 European centres: a database study. Lancet. 2007;369(9555):43\u0026ndash;50.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAarnoudse-Moens CS, Weisglas-Kuperus N, van Goudoever JB, Oosterlaan J. Meta-analysis of neurobehavioral outcomes in very preterm and/or very low birth weight children. Pediatrics. 2009;124(2):717\u0026ndash;28.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAarnoudse-Moens CS, Oosterlaan J, Duivenvoorden HJ, Van Goudoever JB, Weisglas-Kuperus N. Development of preschool and academic skills in children born very preterm. The Journal of Pediatrics. 2011;(158):51\u0026ndash;6.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAarnoudse-Moens CS, Smidts DP, Oosterlaan J, Duivenvoorden HJ, Weisglas-Kuperus N. Executive function in very preterm children at early school age. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2009;37(7):981\u0026ndash;93.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrummelte S, Grunau RE, Chau V, Poskitt KJ, Brant R, Vinall J, et al. Procedural pain and brain development in premature newborns. Ann Neurol. 2012;71(3):385\u0026ndash;96.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmith GC, Gutovich J, Smyser C, Pineda R, Newnham C, Tjoeng TH, et al. Neonatal intensive care unit stress is associated with brain development in preterm infants. Ann Neurol. 2011 Oct;70(4):541\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarbajal R, Lenclen R, Jugie M, Paupe A, Barton BA, Anand KJ. Morphine does not provide adequate analgesia for acute procedural pain among preterm neonates. Pediatrics. 2005;115(6):1494\u0026ndash;500.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTaddio A, Lee C, Yip A, Parvez B, McNamara PJ, Shah V. Intravenous morphine and topical tetracaine for treatment of pain in neonates undergoing central line placement. JAMA. 2006;295(7):793\u0026ndash;800.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBellieni C, Aloisi A, Ceccarelli D, Valenti M, Arrighi D, Muraca M, et al. Intramuscular injections in newborns: analgesic treatment and sex-linked response. J Maternal-Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013;26(4):419\u0026ndash;22.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnston C, Barrington KJ, Taddio A, Carbajal R, Filion F, Johnston leste, et al. Pain in Canadian NICUs: have we improved over the past 12 years? Clin J Pain. 2011;27(3):225\u0026ndash;32.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStevens B, Yamada J, Ohlsson A, Haliburton S, Shorkey A. Sucrose for analgesia in newborn infants undergoing painful procedures. In: Yamada J, editor. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Chichester: John Wiley \u0026amp; Sons, Ltd; 2016. p.\u0026nbsp;CD001069.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBueno M, Yamada J, Harrison D, Khan S, Ohlsson A, Adams-Webber T, et al. A systematic review and meta-analyses of nonsucrose sweet solutions for pain relief in neonates. Pain Research and Management. 2013.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnston C, Campbell-Yeo M, Fernandes A, Inglis D, Streiner D, Zee R. Skin-to-skin care for procedural pain in neonates (Full Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(1):CD008435.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePillai Riddell RR, Racine NM, Gennis HG, Turcotte K, Uman LS, Horton RE, et al. Non-pharmacological management of infant and young child procedural pain. In: Pillai Riddell RR, editor. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Chichester: John Wiley \u0026amp; Sons, Ltd; 2011. p.\u0026nbsp;CD006275.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbbott FV, Guy ER. Effects of morphine, pentobarbital and amphetamine on formalin-induced behaviours in infant rats: sedation versus specific suppression of pain. Pain. 1995;62(3):303\u0026ndash;12.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCampbell-Yeo M, Johnston C, Benoit B, Latimer M, Vincer M, Walker C-D, et al. Trial of Repeated Analgesia with Kangaroo Mother Care (TRAKC Trial). BMC Pediatr. 2013 Dec;9(1):182. 13(.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBellieni CV, Johnston CC. Analgesia, nil or placebo to babies, in trials that test new analgesic treatments for procedural pain. Acta Paediatr. 2016 Feb;105(2):129\u0026ndash;36.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBlass E, Shide D. Some comparisons among the calming and pain-relieving effects of sucrose, glucose, fructose, and lactose in infant rats. Chem Senses. 1994;19(3):239\u0026ndash;49.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMouraux A, Iannetti G. The search for pain biomarkers in the human brain. Brain. 2018;141(12):3290\u0026ndash;307.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSlater R, Cornelissen L, Fabrizi L, Patten D, Yoxen J, Worley A, et al. Oral sucrose as an analgesic drug for procedural pain in newborn infants: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010/09/08 ed. 2010 Oct 9;376(9748):1225\u0026ndash;32.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTruini A, Panuccio G, Galeotti F, Maluccio MR, Sartucci F, Avoli M, et al. Laser-evoked potentials as a tool for assessing the efficacy of antinociceptive drugs. Eur J Pain. 2010 Feb;14(2):222\u0026ndash;5.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStevens B, Yamada J, Dionne K, Lee G, Johnston C, Taddio A. The Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R). Clinical Journal of Pain. 2012.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGibbins S, Stevens B, Yamada J, Campbell-Yeo M. Validation of the PIPP-R. Archives of Pediatrics. 2012.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStevens B, Johnston C, Petryshen P, Taddio A. Premature Infant Pain Profile: development and initial validation. Clin J Pain. 1996 Mar;12(1):13\u0026ndash;22.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGrunau RV, Craig KD. Pain expression in neonates: facial action and cry. Pain. 1987;28(3):395\u0026ndash;410.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCampbell-Yeo ML, Johnston CC, Joseph KS, Feeley N, Chambers CT, Barrington KJ, et al. Cobedding and recovery time after heel lance in preterm twins: results of a randomized trial. Pediatrics. 2012;130(3):500\u0026ndash;6.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCampbell-Yeo M, Johnston C, Chambers C, Joseph K, Feeley N, Barrington K. Do preterm twins mount an empathic response when being near their co-twin undergoing a painful procedure? J Pain. 2014;15(4):31\u0026ndash;1.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLandis J, Koch G. An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics. 1977;33(2):363\u0026ndash;74.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNewborn, AA of PC on F and American Academy of Pediatrics. Policy Statement. Advanced Practice in Neonatal Nursing. Adv Neonatal Care. 2003;3(4):208\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGray J, Richardson D, McCormick M, Workman-Daniels K, Goldmann D. Neonatal therapeutic intervention scoring system: A therapy-based severity-of-illness index. Pediatrics. 1992;90(4):561\u0026ndash;7.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRichardson D, Corcoran J, Escobar G, Lee S. SNAP-II and SNAPPE-II: Simplified newborn illness severity and mortality risk scores. J Pediatr. 2001;138(1):92\u0026ndash;100.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHartley C, Goksan S, Poorun R, Brotherhood K, Mellado GS, Moultrie F, et al. The relationship between nociceptive brain activity, spinal reflex withdrawal and behaviour in newborn infants. Sci Rep. 2015;5(July):12519.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eObeidat HM, Shuriquie M. Effect of breast-feeding and maternal holding in relieving painful responses in full-term neonates. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2015;29(3):248\u0026ndash;54.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEfird J. Blocked randomization with randomly selected block sizes. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2011;8(1):15\u0026ndash;20.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnston C, Campbell-Yeo M, Fernandes A, Inglis D, Streiner D, Zee R. Skin-to-skin care for procedural pain in neonates. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jan;1:CD008435.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGramfort A, Luessi M, Larson E, Engemann D, Strohmeier D, Brodbeck C, et al. MNE software for processing MEG and EEG data. NeuroImage. 2014;86:446\u0026ndash;60.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDien J. Applying Principal Components Analysis to Event-Related Potentials: A Tutorial. Dev Neuropsychol. 2012;37(6):497\u0026ndash;517.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJones L, Laudiano-Dray MP, Whitehead K, Meek J, Fitzgerald M, Fabrizi L, et al. The impact of parental contact upon cortical noxious-related activity in human neonates. Eur J Pain. 2021;25(1):149\u0026ndash;59.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFabrizi L, Worley a, Patten D, Holdridge S, Cornelissen L, Meek J, et al. Electrophysiological measurements and analysis of nociception in human infants. 2011;(December):1\u0026ndash;5.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiaw J. Tactile stimulation and preterm infants. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2000;14(1):84\u0026ndash;103.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFeldman R, Eidelman A. Skin-to-skin contact (kangaroo care) accelerates autonomic and neurobehavioural maturation in preterm infants. Developmental Medicine. 2003.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHarrison L, Olivet L, Cunningham K, Bodin M, Hicks C. Effects of gentle human touch on preterm infants: Pilot study results. Neonatal Netw. 1996;15(2):35\u0026ndash;42.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHarrison L, Leeper J, Yoon M. Effects of early parent touch on preterm infants\u0026rsquo; heart rates and arterial oxygen saturation levels. J Adv Nurs. 1990;15(8):877\u0026ndash;85.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eField T. Preterm infant massage therapy studies: An American approach. Seminars in Neonataology. 2002;7(6):487\u0026ndash;94.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eField T, Diego M. Vagal activity, early growth and emotional development. Infant Behaviour and Development. 2008.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarden S, Hofer M. Independence of benzodiazepine and opiate action in the suppression of isolation distress in rat pups. Behav Neurosci. 1990;104(1):160\u0026ndash;6.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNelson E, Panksepp J. Brain substrates of infant-mother attachment: Contributions of opioids, oxytocin, and norepinephrine. Neurosci Biobehavioural Reviews. 1998;22:437\u0026ndash;52.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePanksepp J, Nelson E, Siviy S. Brain opioids and mother-infant social motivation. Acta Paediatr. 1994;397:40\u0026ndash;6.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePanksepp J, Nelson E, Bekkedal M. Brain systems for the mediation of social separation-distress and social-reward. Evolutionary antecedents and neuropeptide intermediaries. Annals of the New York Academy of Science. 1997;807:78\u0026ndash;100.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMancini F, Beaumont A, Hu L, Haggard P, Iannetti G. Touch inhibts subcortical and cortical nociceptive responses. Pain. 2015;156(10):1936\u0026ndash;44.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCampbell-Yeo M, Disher T, Benoit B, Johnston C. Understanding kangaroo care and its benefits to preterm infants. Pediatric Health, Medicine and Therapeutics. 2015 Mar 18;Volume 6:15.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eConde-Agudelo A, Diaz-Rossello J. Kangaroo mother care to reduce morbidity and mortality in low birthweight infants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011/03/18 ed. 2014 Jan;(3):CD002771.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEngler AJ, Ludington-Hoe SM, Cusson RM, Adams R, Bahnsen M, Brumbaugh E, et al. Kangaroo care: national survey of practice, knowledge, barriers, and perceptions. MCN: Am J Maternal Child Nurs. 2002;27(3):146\u0026ndash;53.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnston CC, Stevens B, Pinelli J, Gibbins S, Filion F, Jack A, et al. Kangaroo care is effective in diminishing pain response in preterm neonates. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003;157(11):1084\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMoore ER, Anderson GC. Randomized controlled trial of very early mother-infant skin-to-skin contact and breastfeeding status. J Midwifery Women\u0026rsquo;s Health. 2007;52(2):116\u0026ndash;24.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnston C, Campbell-Yeo M, Fernandes A, Inglis D, Streiner D, Zee R. Skin-to-skin care for procedural pain in neonates. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2014 Jan;1(1):CD008435.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArditi H, Feldman R, Eidelman A. Effects of human contact and vagal regulation on pain reactivity and visual attention in newborns. Dev Psychobiol. 2006;48(7):561\u0026ndash;73.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHofer M. Hidden regulators in attachment, separation, and loss. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. 1994;59:192\u0026ndash;207.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eC KM,K, R H. J. W. Crying in separated and non-separated newborns: Sound spectrographic analysis. Acta Paediatr Int J Paediatrics. 1996;85(4):471\u0026ndash;5.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMooncey S, Giannakoulopoulos X, Glover V, Acolet D. The effect of mother-infant skin-to-skin contact on plasma cortisol and endorphin concentrations in preterm newborns. Infant Behav Dev. 1997;20(4):553\u0026ndash;7.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBenoit B, Newman A, Martin-Misener R, Latimer M, Campbell-Yeo M. The influence of breastfeeding on cortical and bio-behavioural indicators of procedural pain in newborns: Findings of a randomized controlled trial. Early Hum Dev. 2021 Mar;154:105308.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"trials","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"trls","sideBox":"Learn more about [Trials](http://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"13063","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/trls","title":"Trials","twitterHandle":"MedicalEvidence","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"BMC/SO AJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"infant/neonate, prematurity, pain, acute, skin-to-skin contact, sweet taste, EEG evoked potentials, cortical, bio-behavioural assessment, RCT","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-1510675/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1510675/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBackground\u003c/strong\u003e. Strong evidence suggests that maternal infant skin-to-skin contact (SSC) is effective in reducing behavioural responses to pain. Given the multi-sensory benefits of SSC, it is highly likely that SSC provided during pain in early life may reduce pain-induced brain activity. The aim of this study is to examine the effect of SSC compared to 24% sucrose on pain-induced activity in the preterm infant brain during a medically required heel lance. Secondary objectives include determining a) differences between behavioural pain response and noxious-related brain activity during heel lance; and b) rate of adverse events across groups.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethods\u003c/strong\u003e. We will randomly assign 126 babies (32 to 36 completed weeks gestational age) admitted to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, and their mothers within the first seven days of age to receive: i) SSC plus sterile water; ii) 24% oral sucrose. Each baby will receive a medically indicated heel lance, following a no treatment baseline period. The primary outcome is noxious-related brain activity measured using an electroencephalogram (EEG) pain-specific event-related potential. Secondary outcomes include pain intensity measured using a bio-behavioural infant pain assessment tool (Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised) and rate of adverse events.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDiscussion\u003c/strong\u003e This will be the first clinical trial to compare the effect of SSC and 24% sucrose on pain-induced brain activity in the preterm infant brain during a clinical noxious stimulus, measured using EEG. Given the negative neurodevelopmental outcomes associated with unmanaged pain, it is imperative that preterm babies receive the most effective pain-reducing treatments to improve their health outcomes. Our findings will have important implications in informing optimal pain assessment and management in preterm infants.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTrial registration\u003c/strong\u003e:\u0026nbsp;ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03745963. Date of registration: November 19, 2018.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"The influence of skin-to-skin contact on Cortical Activity during Painful procedures in preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit (iCAP mini): Study protocol for a randomized control trial.","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2022-04-28 21:26:20","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-1510675/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2022-05-03T17:49:57+00:00","index":0,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2022-04-25T13:31:16+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2022-04-25T09:19:59+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Trials","date":"2022-03-31T15:19:01+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"trials","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"trls","sideBox":"Learn more about [Trials](http://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"13063","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/trls","title":"Trials","twitterHandle":"MedicalEvidence","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"BMC/SO AJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"37ded6ed-89ad-45cd-843a-147c796486fb","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 28th, 2022","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2022-05-24T09:27:47+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2022-04-28 21:26:20","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-1510675","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-1510675","identity":"rs-1510675","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"rHA-KDH7Qsr4HCuvH75dn","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}