Literature DB >> 16973640

Digital versus local anesthesia for finger lacerations: a randomized controlled trial.

Stuart Chale1, Adam J Singer, Scott Marchini, Mary Jo McBride, David Kennedy.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare the pain of needle insertion, anesthesia, and suturing in finger lacerations after local anesthesia with prior topical anesthesia with that experienced after digital anesthesia.
METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial in a university-based emergency department (ED), with an annual census of 75,000 patient visits. ED patients aged > or = 8 years with finger lacerations were enrolled. After standard wound preparation and 15-minute topical application of lidocaine-epinephrine-tetracaine (LET) in all wounds, lacerations were randomized to anesthesia with either local or digital infiltration of 1% lidocaine. Pain of needle insertion, anesthetic infiltration, and suturing were recorded on a validated 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) from 0 (none) to 100 (worst); also recorded were percentage of wounds requiring rescue anesthesia; time until anesthesia; percentage of wounds with infection or numbness at day 7. Outcomes were compared by using Mann-Whitney U and chi-square tests. A sample of 52 patients had 80% power to detect a 15-mm difference in pain scores.
RESULTS: Fifty-five patients were randomized to digital (n = 28) or local (n = 27) anesthesia. Mean age (+/-SD) was 38.1 (+/-16.8) years, 29% were female. Mean (+/-SD) laceration length and width were 1.7 (+/-0.7) cm and 2.0 (+/-1.0) mm, respectively. Groups were similar in baseline patient and wound characteristics. There were no between-group differences in pain of needle insertion (mean difference, 1.3 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -17.0 to 14.3 mm); anesthetic infiltration (mean difference, 2.3 mm; 95% CI = -19.7 to 4.4 mm), or suturing (mean difference, 7.6 mm; 95% CI = -3.3 to 21.1 mm). Only one patient in the digital anesthesia group required rescue anesthesia. There were no wound infections or persistent numbness in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: Digital and local anesthesia of finger lacerations with prior application of LET to all wounds results in similar pain of needle insertion, anesthetic infiltration, and pain of suturing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16973640     DOI: 10.1197/j.aem.2006.06.048

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Emerg Med        ISSN: 1069-6563            Impact factor:   3.451


  5 in total

1.  Microneedle-assisted permeation of lidocaine carboxymethylcellulose with gelatine co-polymer hydrogel.

Authors:  Atul Nayak; Diganta B Das; Goran T Vladisavljević
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2013-11-08       Impact factor: 4.200

2.  Two injection digital block versus single subcutaneous palmar injection block for finger lacerations.

Authors:  O M Okur; A Şener; H Ş Kavakli; G K Çelik; N Ö Doğan; F Içme; G P Günaydin
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2016-10-05       Impact factor: 3.693

Review 3.  Topical anaesthetics for pain control during repair of dermal laceration.

Authors:  Baraa O Tayeb; Anthony Eidelman; Cristy L Eidelman; Ewan D McNicol; Daniel B Carr
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-02-22

4.  Digital nerve blocks: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Tiffany Y Borbón; Pingping Qu; T Tausala Coleman-Satterfield; Ryan Kearney; Eileen J Klein
Journal:  J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open       Date:  2022-07-01

5.  Comparison of pain and extent of anesthesia in digital blocks for isolated finger lacerations: A randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Ali Jarragh; Ali Lari; Waleed Burhamah; Mohammed Alherz; Abdullah Nouri; Yahia Alshammari; Ameer Al-Jasim; Sulaiman AlRefai; Naser Alnusif
Journal:  Turk J Emerg Med       Date:  2022-07-01
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.