在医疗过程中对神经分化儿童的程序支持:范围综述。

IF 7.9 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Mari Takashima, Harriet Robertson, Karin Plummer, Catherine Kotzur, Adel Wesley, Alexandra Donaldson, Henrik Hjelmgren, Anna Stålberg, Lisa Burgess, Alexander J Friedman, Laurel Mimmo, Jade Choi, Natalie Barker, Sherelyn Gooley, Nicki Walsh, Vanessa E Cobham, Amanda Ullman
{"title":"在医疗过程中对神经分化儿童的程序支持:范围综述。","authors":"Mari Takashima, Harriet Robertson, Karin Plummer, Catherine Kotzur, Adel Wesley, Alexandra Donaldson, Henrik Hjelmgren, Anna Stålberg, Lisa Burgess, Alexander J Friedman, Laurel Mimmo, Jade Choi, Natalie Barker, Sherelyn Gooley, Nicki Walsh, Vanessa E Cobham, Amanda Ullman","doi":"10.1007/s10567-026-00562-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Neurodivergent children face unique challenges during medical procedures due to distinct sensory processing patterns and communication difficulties. Evidence-based interventions for procedural pain/distress may inadequately address their specific needs, leading to undertreated distress and negative healthcare experiences.Following Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, we conducted comprehensive searches across six databases on January 10, 2025, for studies published 2014-2025 focusing on neurodivergent children (0-21 years) undergoing medical procedures. Two independent reviewers screened studies and extracted data, with results presented as a narrative synthesis with evidence mapping.From 14,393 initial records, 144 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies (n = 121, 84.0%) focused on autism spectrum disorder, with limited representation of other neurodivergent diagnoses. Hospital outpatient settings (n = 93, 64.6%) and dental specialty (n = 50, 34.7%) were most commonly studied. The most frequently used support strategies were visit preparation and support (n = 61, 42.4%), pharmacological agents (n = 48, 33.3%), and patient care plans/pathways (n = 43, 29.9%). Few studies used validated pain and distress assessment tools, with only 4.2% (n = 6) reporting child-reported pain measures. While 74.3% (n = 107) of studies reported distress outcomes, these were primarily observational rather than validated measures.Findings highlight significant gaps in procedural support strategies for neurodivergent children, particularly for conditions beyond autism. There is a critical need for research using validated pain and distress measures, especially those capturing the child's perspective. Future studies should prioritise diverse neurodivergent populations, incorporate structured assessment tools, and evaluate tailored interventions across wider clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":51399,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review","volume":" ","pages":"167-181"},"PeriodicalIF":7.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12979319/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Procedural Support for Neurodivergent Children During Medical Procedures: A Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Mari Takashima, Harriet Robertson, Karin Plummer, Catherine Kotzur, Adel Wesley, Alexandra Donaldson, Henrik Hjelmgren, Anna Stålberg, Lisa Burgess, Alexander J Friedman, Laurel Mimmo, Jade Choi, Natalie Barker, Sherelyn Gooley, Nicki Walsh, Vanessa E Cobham, Amanda Ullman\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10567-026-00562-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Neurodivergent children face unique challenges during medical procedures due to distinct sensory processing patterns and communication difficulties. Evidence-based interventions for procedural pain/distress may inadequately address their specific needs, leading to undertreated distress and negative healthcare experiences.Following Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, we conducted comprehensive searches across six databases on January 10, 2025, for studies published 2014-2025 focusing on neurodivergent children (0-21 years) undergoing medical procedures. Two independent reviewers screened studies and extracted data, with results presented as a narrative synthesis with evidence mapping.From 14,393 initial records, 144 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies (n = 121, 84.0%) focused on autism spectrum disorder, with limited representation of other neurodivergent diagnoses. Hospital outpatient settings (n = 93, 64.6%) and dental specialty (n = 50, 34.7%) were most commonly studied. The most frequently used support strategies were visit preparation and support (n = 61, 42.4%), pharmacological agents (n = 48, 33.3%), and patient care plans/pathways (n = 43, 29.9%). Few studies used validated pain and distress assessment tools, with only 4.2% (n = 6) reporting child-reported pain measures. While 74.3% (n = 107) of studies reported distress outcomes, these were primarily observational rather than validated measures.Findings highlight significant gaps in procedural support strategies for neurodivergent children, particularly for conditions beyond autism. There is a critical need for research using validated pain and distress measures, especially those capturing the child's perspective. Future studies should prioritise diverse neurodivergent populations, incorporate structured assessment tools, and evaluate tailored interventions across wider clinical settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"167-181\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12979319/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-026-00562-w\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2026/2/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-026-00562-w","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由于不同的感觉处理模式和沟通困难,神经分化儿童在医疗过程中面临着独特的挑战。针对程序性疼痛/痛苦的循证干预措施可能无法充分满足他们的具体需求,导致痛苦得不到充分治疗和负面的医疗保健经历。按照乔安娜布里格斯研究所的方法,我们于2025年1月10日在六个数据库中进行了全面的搜索,检索2014-2025年发表的关于接受医疗程序的神经分化儿童(0-21岁)的研究。两名独立审稿人筛选了研究并提取了数据,结果以证据图的叙述综合形式呈现。从14,393份初始记录中,有144项研究符合纳入标准。大多数研究(n = 121, 84.0%)集中在自闭症谱系障碍上,其他神经发散性诊断的代表性有限。医院门诊(n = 93, 64.6%)和牙科专科(n = 50, 34.7%)是最常见的研究对象。最常用的支持策略是就诊准备和支持(n = 61, 42.4%)、药物(n = 48, 33.3%)和患者护理计划/途径(n = 43, 29.9%)。很少有研究使用有效的疼痛和痛苦评估工具,只有4.2% (n = 6)报告了儿童报告的疼痛测量。虽然74.3% (n = 107)的研究报告了痛苦的结果,但这些主要是观察性的,而不是经过验证的测量。研究结果强调了神经分化儿童的程序性支持策略的重大差距,特别是对于自闭症以外的情况。迫切需要使用有效的疼痛和痛苦措施进行研究,特别是那些捕捉儿童视角的措施。未来的研究应该优先考虑不同的神经分化人群,结合结构化的评估工具,并在更广泛的临床环境中评估量身定制的干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Procedural Support for Neurodivergent Children During Medical Procedures: A Scoping Review.

Procedural Support for Neurodivergent Children During Medical Procedures: A Scoping Review.

Procedural Support for Neurodivergent Children During Medical Procedures: A Scoping Review.

Procedural Support for Neurodivergent Children During Medical Procedures: A Scoping Review.

Neurodivergent children face unique challenges during medical procedures due to distinct sensory processing patterns and communication difficulties. Evidence-based interventions for procedural pain/distress may inadequately address their specific needs, leading to undertreated distress and negative healthcare experiences.Following Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, we conducted comprehensive searches across six databases on January 10, 2025, for studies published 2014-2025 focusing on neurodivergent children (0-21 years) undergoing medical procedures. Two independent reviewers screened studies and extracted data, with results presented as a narrative synthesis with evidence mapping.From 14,393 initial records, 144 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies (n = 121, 84.0%) focused on autism spectrum disorder, with limited representation of other neurodivergent diagnoses. Hospital outpatient settings (n = 93, 64.6%) and dental specialty (n = 50, 34.7%) were most commonly studied. The most frequently used support strategies were visit preparation and support (n = 61, 42.4%), pharmacological agents (n = 48, 33.3%), and patient care plans/pathways (n = 43, 29.9%). Few studies used validated pain and distress assessment tools, with only 4.2% (n = 6) reporting child-reported pain measures. While 74.3% (n = 107) of studies reported distress outcomes, these were primarily observational rather than validated measures.Findings highlight significant gaps in procedural support strategies for neurodivergent children, particularly for conditions beyond autism. There is a critical need for research using validated pain and distress measures, especially those capturing the child's perspective. Future studies should prioritise diverse neurodivergent populations, incorporate structured assessment tools, and evaluate tailored interventions across wider clinical settings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: Editors-in-Chief: Dr. Ronald J. Prinz, University of South Carolina and Dr. Thomas H. Ollendick, Virginia Polytechnic Institute Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal that provides an international, interdisciplinary forum in which important and new developments in this field are identified and in-depth reviews on current thought and practices are published. The Journal publishes original research reviews, conceptual and theoretical papers, and related work in the broad area of the behavioral sciences that pertains to infants, children, adolescents, and families. Contributions originate from a wide array of disciplines including, but not limited to, psychology (e.g., clinical, community, developmental, family, school), medicine (e.g., family practice, pediatrics, psychiatry), public health, social work, and education. Topical content includes science and application and covers facets of etiology, assessment, description, treatment and intervention, prevention, methodology, and public policy. Submissions are by invitation only and undergo peer review. The Editors, in consultation with the Editorial Board, invite highly qualified experts to contribute original papers on topics of timely interest and significance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书