Procedural pain in paediatrics has been identified as an area causing considerable distress and needing major improvement (Dowden et al, 2008). The Royal Australian College of Physicians (RACP) (2006) confirmed this stating that while evidence based guidelines on pain recognition and assessment are available, guidelines on procedural pain are not specifically included in these. The benefits of supportive interventions during a procedure have been well documented. However the use of these measures in children are variable. While in an emergency setting children receiving laceration repair and sutures topical aesthetic, few patients undergoing procedures like venepuncture, intravenous canulation and urethral catheterisation received comfort measures (Czarnecki,Turner, Collins, Doellman, Wrona and Reynolds, 2011). Prospective consultation of clinical staff at specialist paediatric hospitals revealed that staff acknowledged that more consistent pain management practices and guidelines were needed (Bowden et al,2008). In regards to policies and procedures within the current workplace, being a small unit there were not a lot of policies available with no specific policies available for procedural pain. Staff reported that they generally borrowed from larger hospitals if they needed more comprehensive policies or procedures. A lack of easy access to paediatric pain policies may become problematic as staff do not have consistent guidelines to work from which may contribute to inconsistent management of pain in procedures and less effective pain management. The RACP (2006) recognise a lack of recommended policies and procedures for pain relief as a major barrier to effectively and uniformly treating pain. Schechter (2008) confirms this stating that a lack of clear policies can lead to a lack of uniformity in approach and uneven and inconsistent pain control. Samuels and Fetzer (2009) state that