Purpose To evaluate the feasibility of oral cryotherapy (OC) in children and to investigate if OC reduces the incidence of severe oral mucositis (OM), oral pain, and opioid use in children undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) . Methods Fifty-three children, 4–17 years old, scheduled for HSCT in Sweden were included and randomized to OC or control using a computer-generated list. OC instructions were to cool the mouth with ice for as long as possible during chemotherapy infusions with an intended time of ≥ 30 min. Feasibility criteria in the OC group were as follows: (1) compliance ≥ 70%; (2) considerable discomfort during OC < 20%; (3) no serious adverse events; and (4) ice administered to all children. Grade of OM and oral pain was recorded daily using the WHO-Oral Toxicity Scale (WHO-OTS), Children’s International Oral Mucositis Evaluation Scale, and Numerical Rating Scale. Use of opioids was collected from the medical records. Results Forty-nine children (mean age 10.5 years) were included in analysis (OC = 26, control = 23). The feasibility criteria were not met. Compliance was poor, especially for the younger children, and only 15 children (58%) used OC as instructed. Severe OM (WHO-OTS ≥ 3) was recorded in 26 children (OC = 15, control = 11). OC did not reduce the incidence of severe OM, oral pain, or opioid use. Conclusion The feasibility criteria were not met, and the RCT could not show that OC reduces the incidence of severe OM, oral pain, or opioid use in pediatric patients treated with a variety of conditioning regimens for HSCT. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov id: NCT01789658 Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00520-019-05258-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Oral mucositis is a common side effect of chemo and radiotherapy causing painful ulcers in the oral mucosa. One of the preventive treatments recommended in international guidelines is oral cryotherapy (OC). Randomized clinical trials on OC have used ice and ice-chips to cool the mouth, but this cooling method can be difficult for the patients to tolerate. Studies have shown that OC with ice for a period of 60 min reduces the oral temperature by 12.9 °C. The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the temperature reduction and tolerability of OC using an intra-oral air-cooling (IOAC) device in healthy volunteers. Twelve healthy volunteers, mean age 35.4 years, were included in the study. They were treated with OC using the IOAC device for 60 min. Measurements of temperature were obtained at baseline, 5 and 60 min using a FLIR® C2 camera. After the OC session, tolerability and adverse events were documented using a questionnaire. All participants were able to use the device for 60 min. The overall temperature reduction after 5 min of OC was 10.7°C (p < 0.01) and after 60 min 14.5°C (p < 0.01). The most common adverse events were bad fit of the mouthpiece (n = 6), hypersalivation (n = 6), and difficulties swallowing (n = 5). The oral device reduced the temperature of the oral mucosa as much as treatment with ice with tolerable adverse events. The mouthpiece will be remodeled to improve tolerability before further studies are conducted.

Aim To investigate the feasibility, and perform a pilot study, of a randomised clinical trial, investigating whether children experience less pain, fear and/or distress when they receive oral ibuprofen vs placebo before a needle is inserted in a subcutaneously implanted intravenous port. Methods Twenty‐three children were included consecutively and randomised to either oral ibuprofen (n = 12) 7.5 mg/kg body weight or placebo (n = 11). The child's pain, fear and distress were reported by parents, nurses and the children (if ≥7 years of age). Feasibility criteria were defined as (a) ≥4 children included/month, (b) ≥80% of eligible patients agreed to participate, (c) >90% treated according to protocol, (d) <5% missing data, (e) s‐cortisol samples analysed in ≥90% of the children. Results All feasibility criteria were met except recruitment and consent. Parents, nurses and children reported no trend of benefit of oral ibuprofen with regard to pain, fear and distress compared with placebo. Conclusion The study failed to meet important feasibility criteria and was closed due to low recruitment rate and absence of trend of effect. From this data, we cannot state that ibuprofen is not helpful in needle procedures but that it seems unlikely.

No abstract