Importance of data for effective evaluation of child life services

Sample Solution

Child Life Services: Pain Management and Pet Therapy in Hospitals

Area of Interest: Pain Management

Clinical Practice Problem: Hospitalized children often experience pain from procedures, illnesses, or injuries. This pain can lead to anxiety, fear, and difficulty coping with their situation. Traditional pain management methods may not be sufficient for all children, and exploring alternative approaches can benefit their well-being.

PICOT Question: In hospitalized children (Population), how does implementing a pet therapy program (Intervention) compared to standard pain management protocols (Comparison) affect their documented pain levels (Outcome) measured by self-reported pain scales and physiological indicators (e.g., heart rate, blood pressure) over a three-month period (Time)?

Best Available Evidence:

After searching relevant databases (e.g., PubMed, CINAHL), a 2021 randomized controlled trial (RCT) titled "Effects of Animal-Assisted Therapy on Pain and Anxiety in Hospitalized Children Undergoing Peripheral Intravenous Catheterization" by Coelho et al. (2021) was identified.

Strengths of the Evidence (Using the CRAP Test):

• Credibility: The study was published in a peer-reviewed journal, indicating a rigorous review process.
• Relevance: The study directly addresses the PICOT question, focusing on hospitalized children, pet therapy intervention, pain reduction, and a similar timeframe.
• Accuracy: The study employed a randomized controlled design, considered the gold standard for evidence-based practice.
• Purpose: The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of pet therapy for pain management, aligning with the research question's purpose.

Full Answer Section

Critical Analysis:

The study by Coelho et al. (2021) found that children in the pet therapy group experienced significantly lower pain scores and displayed calmer behavior compared to the control group. However, limitations exist:

• Sample size: The study included a relatively small sample size (N=64), potentially limiting generalizability.
• Specific pain context: The study focused on pain associated with intravenous catheterization, and its results may not be directly applicable to other types of pain experiences.
• Long-term effects: The study only assessed outcomes over a three-month period, and the long-term effects of pet therapy remain unclear.

Recommendations for Practice Changes:

Based on the available evidence and acknowledging the limitations, the following recommendations are made:

• Consider implementing a pilot pet therapy program: Introduce a pilot program in a controlled setting to assess its feasibility, effectiveness, and impact on children's pain management within your specific hospital context.
• Conduct further research: Encourage additional research exploring the effectiveness of pet therapy for broader pain experiences in hospitalized children and across different age groups.
• Collaborate with child life specialists and animal-assisted therapy organizations: Develop evidence-based protocols and ensure proper training and safety measures for implementing pet therapy programs effectively and ethically.

Conclusion:

While the evidence suggests potential benefits of pet therapy in reducing pain for hospitalized children, further research is needed to confirm its wider effectiveness and long-term impact. A collaborative approach involving child life specialists, researchers, and animal-assisted therapy organizations can guide the development and implementation of evidence-based pet therapy programs to improve the well-being of hospitalized children experiencing pain.

Note: This is just an example, and the best evidence available will always depend on the specific PICOT question and the date of the search. Remember to consult with relevant healthcare professionals and conduct a comprehensive search for the most up-to-date and relevant research before implementing any changes in practice.