A nonpharmacological method can be an alternative or complement to analgesics.The aim of this study was to evaluate if music medicine influences pain and anxiety in children undergoing lumbar punctures. A randomized clinical trial was used in 40 children (aged 7-12 years) with leukemia, followed by interviews in 20 of these participants. The participants were randomly assigned to a music group (n = 20) or control group (n = 20). The primary outcome was pain scores and the secondary was heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, and oxygen saturation measured before, during, and after the procedure. Anxiety scores were measured before and after the procedure. Interviews with open-ended questions were conducted in conjunction with the completed procedures. The results showed lower pain scores and heart and respiratory rates in the music group during and after the lumbar puncture. The anxiety scores were lower in the music group both before and after the procedure. The findings from the interviews confirmed the quantity results through descriptions of a positive experience by the children, including less pain and fear.

The repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic on children’s lives deserve attention. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of anxiety among Brazilian children and its associated factors during social distancing during COVID-19. We used a cross-sectional design with an online survey from April to May 2020 in Brazil. We included children aged 6–12 years and their guardians. The Children’s Anxiety Questionnaire (CAQ; scores 4–12) and the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS; scores 0–10) were used to measure anxiety. We enrolled 157 girls and 132 boys, with a mean age of 8.84 (±2.05) years; 88.9% of respondents were mothers. Based on CAQ ≥ 9, the prevalence of anxiety was 19.4% (n = 56), and higher among children with parents with essential jobs and those who were social distancing without parents. In logistic regression, the following variables were associated with higher CAQ scores: social distancing without parents; more persons living together in home; and education level of guardians. Based on NRS > 7, the prevalence of anxiety was 21.8% (n = 63); however, no associations with NRS scores were found with the investigated variables. These findings suggest the necessity of implementing public health actions targeting these parents and their children at the population level.

Objective: The aim of this paper was to discuss differences between having a child perspective and taking the child’s perspective based on the problem being investigated. Methods: Conceptual paper based on narrative review. Results: The child’s perspective in research concerning children that need additional support are important. The difference between having a child perspective and taking the child’s perspective in conjunction with the need to know children’s opinions has been discussed in the literature. From an ideological perspective the difference between the two perspectives seems self-evident, but the perspectives might be better seen as different ends on a continuum solely from an adult’s view of children to solely the perspective of children themselves. Depending on the research question, the design of the study may benefit from taking either perspective. In this article, we discuss the difference between the perspectives based on the problem being investigated, children’s capacity to express opinions, environmental adaptations and the degree of interpretation needed to understand children’s opinions. Conclusion: The examples provided indicate that children’s opinions can be regarded in most research, although to different degrees.

Children continue to experience harm when undergoing clinical procedures despite increased evidence of the need to improve the provision of child-centred care. The international ISupport collaboration aimed to develop standards to outline and explain good procedural practice and the rights of children within the context of a clinical procedure. The rights-based standards for children undergoing tests, treatments, investigations, examinations and interventions were developed using an iterative, multi-phased, multi-method and multi-stakeholder consensus building approach. This consensus approach used a range of online and face to face methods across three phases to ensure ongoing engagement with multiple stakeholders. The views and perspectives of 203 children and young people, 78 parents and 418 multi-disciplinary professionals gathered over a two year period (2020–2022) informed the development of international rights-based standards for the care of children having tests, treatments, examinations and interventions. The standards are the first to reach international multi-stakeholder consensus on definitions of supportive and restraining holds. Conclusion: This is the first study of its kind which outlines international rights-based procedural care standards from multi-stakeholder perspectives. The standards offer health professionals and educators clear evidence-based tools to support discussions and practice changes to challenge prevailing assumptions about holding or restraining children and instead encourage a focus on the interests and rights of the child. What is Known:• Children continue to experience short and long-term harm when undergoing clinical procedures despite increased evidence of the need to improve the provision of child-centred care.• Professionals report uncertainty and tensions in applying evidence-based practice to children’s procedural care. What is New:• This is the first study of its kind which has developed international rights-based procedural care standards from multi-stakeholder perspectives.• The standards are the first to reach international multi-stakeholder consensus on definitions of supportive and restraining holds.