Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

Analgesic efficacy and safety of morphine in the Procedural Pain in Premature Infants (Poppi) study: randomised placebo-controlled trial

Hartley, Caroline; Moultrie, Fiona; Hoskin, Amy; Green, Gabrielle; Monk, Vaneesha; Bell, Jennifer L.; King, Andrew R.; Buckle, Miranda; van der Vaart, Marianne; Gursul, Deniz; Goksan, Sezgi; Juszczak, Edmund; Norman, Jane E.; Rogers, Richard; Patel, Chetan; Adams, Eleri; Slater, Rebeccah

Analgesic efficacy and safety of morphine in the Procedural Pain in Premature Infants (Poppi) study: randomised placebo-controlled trial Thumbnail


Authors

Caroline Hartley

Fiona Moultrie

Amy Hoskin

Gabrielle Green

Vaneesha Monk

Jennifer L. Bell

Andrew R. King

Miranda Buckle

Marianne van der Vaart

Deniz Gursul

Sezgi Goksan

Jane E. Norman

Richard Rogers

Chetan Patel

Eleri Adams

Rebeccah Slater



Abstract

Background: Infant pain has immediate and long-term effects but is undertreated because of a paucity of evidence-based analgesics. Although morphine is often used to sedate ventilated infants, its analgesic efficacy is unclear. We aimed to establish whether oral morphine could provide effective and safe analgesia in non-ventilated premature infants for acute procedural pain. Methods: In this single-centre masked trial, 31 infants at the John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK, were randomly allocated using a web-based facility with a minimisation algorithm to either 100 μg/kg oral morphine sulphate or placebo 1 h before a clinically required heel lance and retinopathy of prematurity screening examination, on the same occasion. Eligible infants were born prematurely at less than 32 weeks' gestation or with a birthweight lower than 1501 g and had a gestational age of 34–42 weeks at the time of the study. The co-primary outcome measures were the Premature Infant Pain Profile–Revised (PIPP-R) score after retinopathy of prematurity screening and the magnitude of noxious-evoked brain activity after heel lancing. Secondary outcome measures assessed physiological stability and safety. This trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database (number 2014-003237-25). Findings: Between Oct 30, 2016, and Nov 17, 2017, 15 infants were randomly allocated to morphine and 16 to placebo; one infant assigned placebo was withdrawn from the study before monitoring began. The predefined stopping boundary was crossed, and trial recruitment stopped because of profound respiratory adverse effects of morphine without suggestion of analgesic efficacy. None of the co-primary outcome measures differed significantly between groups. PIPP-R score after retinopathy of prematurity screening was mean 11·1 (SD 3·2) with morphine and 10·5 (3·4) with placebo (mean difference 0·5, 95% CI −2·0 to 3·0; p=0·66). Noxious-evoked brain activity after heel lancing was median 0·99 (IQR 0·40–1·56) with morphine and 0·75 (0·33–1·22) with placebo (median difference 0·25, 95% CI −0·16 to 0·80; p=0·25). Interpretation: Administration of oral morphine (100 μg/kg) to non-ventilated premature infants has the potential for harm without analgesic efficacy. We do not recommend oral morphine for retinopathy of prematurity screening and strongly advise caution if considering its use for other acute painful procedures in non-ventilated premature infants. Funding: Wellcome Trust and National Institute for Health Research.

Citation

Hartley, C., Moultrie, F., Hoskin, A., Green, G., Monk, V., Bell, J. L., King, A. R., Buckle, M., van der Vaart, M., Gursul, D., Goksan, S., Juszczak, E., Norman, J. E., Rogers, R., Patel, C., Adams, E., & Slater, R. (2018). Analgesic efficacy and safety of morphine in the Procedural Pain in Premature Infants (Poppi) study: randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet, 392(10164), 2595-2605. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736%2818%2931813-0

Journal Article Type Article
Acceptance Date Aug 1, 2018
Online Publication Date Nov 30, 2018
Publication Date Dec 15, 2018
Deposit Date Jan 29, 2024
Publicly Available Date Jan 31, 2024
Journal The Lancet
Print ISSN 0140-6736
Electronic ISSN 1474-547X
Publisher Elsevier
Peer Reviewed Peer Reviewed
Volume 392
Issue 10164
Pages 2595-2605
DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736%2818%2931813-0
Public URL https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/output/17088808
Publisher URL https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)31813-0/fulltext
Related Public URLs https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673618318130