The efficacy of socially assistive robots in improving children’s pain and negative affectivity during needle-based invasive treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis

• Published in: BMC pediatrics Vol. 24; no. 1; pp. 643 - 16
• Main Authors: Pan, Xin-Yun, Bi, Xuan-Yi, Nong, Yan-Ning, Ye, Xu-Chun, Yan, Yan, Shang, Jing, Zhou, Yi-Min, Yao, Yu-Zhe
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BioMed Central Ltd 10.10.2024; BioMed Central; BMC
• Subjects: Acute pain; Anxiety; Anxiety in children; Autism; Care and treatment; Causes of; Child; Clinical trials; Emotions; Fear & phobias; Handbooks; Health aspects; Humans; Immunization; Intervention; Meta-analysis; Needles; Pain in children; Pain management; Pain Management - methods; Pain, Procedural - etiology; Pain, Procedural - prevention & control; Pediatric research; Pediatrics; Phlebotomy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Robotics; Robots; Smartphones; Systematic review; China; Pediatrics; Systematic review; Acute pain; Emotions; Robotics; Meta-analysis
• ISSN: 1471-2431; 1471-2431
• DOI: 10.1186/s12887-024-05116-z

The ability of socially assistive robots (SARs) to treat dementia and Alzheimer's disease has been verified. Currently, to increase the range of their application, there is an increasing amount of interest in using SARs to relieve pain and negative emotions among children in routine medical settings. However, there is little consensus regarding the use of these robots. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of SARs on pain and negative affectivity among children undergoing invasive needle-based procedures. This study was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that was conducted in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook guidelines. The PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, and WanFang databases were searched from inception to January 2024 to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2.0 (RoB2.0) to assess the risk of bias among the included studies, and we used RevMan 5.4 software to conduct the meta-analysis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to assess the quality of the evidence. Ten RCTs involving 815 pediatric subjects were selected for this review and reported outcomes related to pain and emotions during IV placement, port needle insertion, flu vaccination, blood sampling, and dental treatment. Children undergoing needle-related procedures with SARs reported less anxiety (SMD= -0.36; 95% CI= -0.64, -0.09) and fewer distressed avoidance behaviors (SMD= -0.67; 95% CI= -1.04, -0.30) than did those receiving typical care. There were nonsignificant differences between these groups in terms of in pain (SMD = -0.02; 95% CI = - 0.81, 0.78) and fear (SMD = 0.38; 95% CI= -0.06, 0.82). The results of exploratory subgroup analyses revealed no statistically significant differences based on the intervention type of robots or anesthetic use. The use of SARs is a promising intervention method for alleviating anxiety and distress among children undergoing needle-related procedures. However, additional high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to further validate these conclusions. The protocol of this study has been registered in the database PROSPERO (registration ID: CRD42023413279).