OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes of arthrocentesis with the new highly controllable, one handed reciprocating procedure syringe compared with a conventional syringe. METHODS:100 arthrocentesis procedures were randomised between the reciprocating syringe and the conventional syringe. Outcome measures included patient pain, procedure duration, operator satisfaction, synovial fluid volume, cell counts, and complications. RESULTS: 50 arthrocentesis procedures with the conventional syringe resulted in a mean (SD) procedure time of 3.39 (1.88) minutes, a mean VAPS (patient pain) score of 5.35 (3.15), and a mean VASS (operator satisfaction) score of 4.88 (1.92); 30 of the 50 subjects experienced moderate to severe pain (VAPS score 5 or greater) during arthrocentesis. In contrast, the reciprocating syringe resulted in a reduced procedure time of 1.94 (1.14) minutes (p<0.001), a reduced VAPS (patient pain) score of 2.54 (1.60) (p<0.001), and an increased VASS (operator satisfaction) score of 8.91 (0.79) (p<0.001). Only five of the 50 of subjects experienced moderate to severe pain with the reciprocating syringe. Synovial cell counts were similar between the two syringes (p>0.05), but there was a trend toward greater volume (greater synovial fluid yield) and fewer red blood cells with the reciprocating syringe. CONCLUSIONS: Arthrocentesis with a conventional syringe results in moderate to severe pain in 60% of subjects. The reciprocating syringe prevents significant pain, reduces procedure time, and improves physician performance of arthrocentesis. The reciprocating syringe is superior to the conventional syringe in arthrocentesis.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes of arthrocentesis with the new highly controllable, one handed reciprocating procedure syringe compared with a conventional syringe. METHODS: 100 arthrocentesis procedures were randomised between the reciprocating syringe and the conventional syringe. Outcome measures included patientpain, procedure duration, operator satisfaction, synovial fluid volume, cell counts, and complications. RESULTS: 50 arthrocentesis procedures with the conventional syringe resulted in a mean (SD) procedure time of 3.39 (1.88) minutes, a mean VAPS (patientpain) score of 5.35 (3.15), and a mean VASS (operator satisfaction) score of 4.88 (1.92); 30 of the 50 subjects experienced moderate to severe pain (VAPS score 5 or greater) during arthrocentesis. In contrast, the reciprocating syringe resulted in a reduced procedure time of 1.94 (1.14) minutes (p<0.001), a reduced VAPS (patientpain) score of 2.54 (1.60) (p<0.001), and an increased VASS (operator satisfaction) score of 8.91 (0.79) (p<0.001). Only five of the 50 of subjects experienced moderate to severe pain with the reciprocating syringe. Synovial cell counts were similar between the two syringes (p>0.05), but there was a trend toward greater volume (greater synovial fluid yield) and fewer red blood cells with the reciprocating syringe. CONCLUSIONS: Arthrocentesis with a conventional syringe results in moderate to severe pain in 60% of subjects. The reciprocating syringe prevents significant pain, reduces procedure time, and improves physician performance of arthrocentesis. The reciprocating syringe is superior to the conventional syringe in arthrocentesis.
Authors: Randy R Sibbitt; Dennis J Palmer; Wilmer L Sibbitt; Arthur D Bankhurst Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2010-11-06 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Lawrence G Kettwich; Wilmer L Sibbitt; N Suzanne Emil; Usman Ashraf; Leslie Sanchez-Goettler; Yumna Thariani; Arthur D Bankhurst Journal: Amyloid Date: 2012-03-27 Impact factor: 7.141
Authors: Natalia R Chavez-Chiang; Wilmer L Sibbitt; Philip A Band; Suzanne L DeLea; Kye S Park; Arthur D Bankhurst Journal: Rheumatol Int Date: 2011-01-21 Impact factor: 2.631
Authors: Colbert E Chavez-Chiang; Wilmer L Sibbitt; Philip A Band; Natalia R Chavez-Chiang; Suzanne L DeLea; Arthur D Bankhurst Journal: Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Ther Technol Date: 2011-03-30