			Home About us Contact

Local Anaesthetic Injections (local + anaesthetic_injection)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	100%

Selected Abstracts

The effect of local anaesthetic spray on the pain associated with local anaesthetic injection, prior to biopsy or loop diathermy to the cervix in the outpatient colposcopy clinic

BJOG : AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, Issue 5 2000
R. J. Connell Clinical Research Fellow
We evaluated the effectiveness of local anaesthetic spray prior to injection of local anaesthetic before biopsy or large loop excision of the transformation zone of the cervix at colposcopy. This was a prospective, randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled study involving 51 women. Pain or discomfort was measured using a four-point categorical scale and a visual analogue score. Our results show that the use of local anaesthetic spray has no effect on the pain or discomfort experienced by patients having local anaesthetic injections to the cervix, and cannot be recommended. [source]

The use of an intra-oral injection of ketorolac in the treatment of irreversible pulpitis

INTERNATIONAL ENDODONTIC JOURNAL, Issue 11 2005
A. C. Mellor
Abstract Aim, To examine whether an intra-oral injection of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (ketorolac), in association with conventional local anaesthetic techniques, would improve the pulp extirpation rate in teeth with irreversible pulpitis. Methodology, A two group double-blind clinical trial was undertaken in the Dental Casualty Department of the University of Manchester School of Dentistry. Patients were randomly allocated to either the test or control group. The test group received an intra-oral injection of ketorolac (30 mg in 1 mL) in the buccal sulcus adjacent to the tooth being treated. After an interval of 15 min, they then received 2.2 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1 : 80 000 epinephrine by buccal infiltration in the maxilla or by inferior dental block in the mandible. The control group received an intra-oral injection of normal saline (1 mL) in the buccal sulcus adjacent to the tooth being treated, followed by the same local anaesthetic regime as the test group after the 15 min interval. Fifteen minutes after the local anaesthetic injections, pulp extirpation was attempted. All patients completed the short-form McGill pain questionnaire prior to treatment and completed identical questionnaires at 6 and 24 h after treatment. Results, The study protocol set the number of patients to be treated at twenty. However, as the study progressed it became apparent that the intra-oral injection of ketorolac caused significant pain to four of the five patients who received it; therefore the study was terminated after ten patients had been treated. The results from the patients treated showed no significant difference in the pulp extirpation rate between the test and control groups. However, patients with higher pain scores at baseline were less likely to have the pulp completely extirpated, irrespective of whether they were in the test or control group. Pain scores for all patients decreased significantly from baseline to 24 h. Conclusion, An intra-oral injection of ketorolac did not improve the pulp extirpation rate in a small group of patients with irreversible pulpitis compared with a placebo. In addition, it was associated with such significant pain on injection that it cannot be recommended as a treatment in this situation. [source]

The effect of vibration on pain during local anaesthesia injections

AUSTRALIAN DENTAL JOURNAL, Issue 2 2009
E Nanitsos
Abstract Background:, The "gate control" theory suggests pain can be reduced by simultaneous activation of nerve fibres that conduct non-noxious stimuli. This study investigated the effects of vibration stimuli on pain experienced during local anaesthetic injections. Methods:, In a preliminary study, subjects were asked to rate anticipated and actual pain from regional anaesthetic injections in the oral cavity. A second study compared, within subjects, pain from injections with and without a simultaneous vibration stimulus. Both infiltration and block anaesthetic injection techniques were assessed. In each subject, two similar injections were given and with one, a vibration stimulus was randomly allocated. Injection pain was assessed by visual analogue scale and McGill pain descriptors. Results:, Both infiltration and block injections were painful (mean anticipated intensity: 31.25, actual: 17.82 mm on 100 mm scale). Pain intensity with and without vibration was 12.9 mm (range 0,67) and 22.2 mm (range 0,83) respectively (p = 0.00005, paired T-test), and this effect was seen with both infiltration (p = 0.032) and block anaesthetic (p = 0.0001) injection subgroups. Furthermore, compared to no vibration-stimulus injections, injections with vibration resulted in less pain descriptors chosen (p = 0.004), and the descriptors had a lower pain rating (p = 0.001). Conclusions:, The results suggest that vibration can be used to decrease pain during dental local anaesthetic administration. [source]

The effect of local anaesthetic spray on the pain associated with local anaesthetic injection, prior to biopsy or loop diathermy to the cervix in the outpatient colposcopy clinic

Procedural pain of an ultrasound-guided brachial plexus block: a comparison of axillary and infraclavicular approaches

ACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, Issue 4 2010
B. S. FREDERIKSEN
Background: Ultrasound (US)-guided infraclavicular (IC) and axillary (AX) blocks have similar effectiveness. Therefore, limiting procedural pain may help to choose a standard approach. The primary aims of this randomized study were to assess patient's pain during the block and to recognize its cause. Methods: Eighty patients were randomly allocated to the IC or the AX group. A blinded investigator asked the patients to quantify block pain on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS 0,100) and to indicate the most unpleasant component (needle passes, paraesthesie or local anaesthetics injection). Sensory block was assessed every 10 min. After 30 min, the unblocked nerves were supplemented. Patients were ready for surgery when they had analgesia or anaesthesia of the five nerves distal to the elbow. Preliminary scan time, block performance and latency times, readiness for surgery, adverse events and patient's acceptance were recorded. Results: The axillary approach resulted in lower maximum VAS scores (median 12) than the infraclavicular approach (median 21). This difference was not statistically significant (P=0.07). Numbers of patients indicating the most painful component were similar in both groups. Patients in either group were ready for surgery after 25 min. Two patients in the IC group and seven in the AX group needed block supplementation (n.s.). Block performance times and number of needle passes were significantly lower in the IC group. Patients' acceptance was 98% in both groups. Conclusions: We did not find significant differences between the two approaches in procedural pain and patient's acceptance. The choice of approach may depend on the anaesthesiologist's experience and the patient's preferences. [source]