Transthecal Metacarpal Block Versus Traditional Digital Block for Painful Finger Procedures in Children

NCT ID: NCT00130104

Last Updated: 2007-10-05

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE4

Total Enrollment

92 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2005-07-31

Study Completion Date

2007-08-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The purpose of this study is to determine if the transthecal metacarpal block is superior to the traditional digital block for regional digital anesthesia in children.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Background: Finger injuries and infections are common presenting problems in the pediatric emergency department. A traditional digital block, requiring at least two injections of anesthetic, is the traditional method of regional anesthesia for many finger procedures. Digital blocks can sometimes be difficult to administer and assess for effectiveness especially in children. A newer procedure, the transthecal metacarpal block, may be easier to administer, and more effective with one injection.

Objective: To determine if the transthecal metacarpal block (MCB) provides superior digit anesthesia in children requiring painful finger procedures as compared to the traditional digital block (TDB).

Methods: A randomized clinical trial comparing the MCB to the TDB will be conducted in an urban, tertiary care pediatric emergency department. Children \<18 years of age, presenting to the emergency department with a finger injury or infection, which requires regional anesthesia for repair will be screened for eligibility. Eligible patients, with appropriate consent will be randomized to receive either the MCB or TDB with 1% Lidocaine. The primary outcome, success of the block will be assessed using pinprick testing after a standardized wait time. Secondary outcomes including pain with the block and repair, repairing physician satisfaction, and short-term complications will also be assessed.

Implications: Finding successful methods of anesthesia and pain control are paramount in the pediatric emergency department. In addition, using a type of digital block which is easy to administer, successful, and requires only one injection would give physicians confidence to treat finger injuries in children with regional anesthesia and possibly avoid procedural sedation in some cases. To date, no studies have been published on the efficacy of digital blocks in children. This study will also serve to give baseline success rates for both types of digital blocks.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Finger Injuries

Keywords

Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.

digital block regional anesthesia finger repair Fingers Anesthesia, Conduction

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

SINGLE_GROUP

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

MCB

randomized to receive the metacarpal block for anesthesia

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Transthecal Metacarpal Block

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Transthecal Metacarpal Block

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Age \<18 years
* Greater than 10 kg in weight
* Have finger injuries or infections that will require digital regional anesthesia
* Require only local anesthesia for the repair
* English speaking

Exclusion Criteria

* Have previous participation in this study
* Need procedural sedation at the onset of the repair
* Have allergy to lidocaine or amide-type local anesthetics
* Have infection at the sites of block injection
* Have known coagulopathy
Maximum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

University of Pennsylvania

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Children's Hospital of Philadelphia

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Elizabeth R Alpern, MD, MSCE

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Division of Emergency Medicine

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

The Children's Hospital Of Philadelphia Emergency Department

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Bhende MS, Dandrea LA, Davis HW. Hand injuries in children presenting to a pediatric emergency department. Ann Emerg Med. 1993 Oct;22(10):1519-23. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(05)81251-x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 8214828 (View on PubMed)

Kelly JJ, Spektor M. Nerve Blocks of the Thorax and Extremities. In:Roberts J, Hedges J, eds. Clinical Procedures in Emergency Medicine. St. Louis: WB Saunders, 2004.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Robson AK, Bloom PA. Suturing of digital lacerations: digital block or local infiltration? Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1990 Nov;72(6):360-1.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 2241053 (View on PubMed)

Flarity-Reed K. Methods of digital block. J Emerg Nurs. 2002 Aug;28(4):351-4. doi: 10.1067/men.2002.125539. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12122413 (View on PubMed)

Chiu DT. Transthecal digital block: flexor tendon sheath used for anesthetic infusion. J Hand Surg Am. 1990 May;15(3):471-7. doi: 10.1016/0363-5023(90)90063-w.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 2348068 (View on PubMed)

Brutus JP, Baeten Y, Chahidi N, Kinnen L, Ledoux P, Moermans JP. Single injection digital block: comparison between three techniques. Chir Main. 2002 May;21(3):182-7. doi: 10.1016/s1297-3203(02)00107-5.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12116830 (View on PubMed)

Cummings AJ, Tisol WB, Meyer LE. Modified transthecal digital block versus traditional digital block for anesthesia of the finger. J Hand Surg Am. 2004 Jan;29(1):44-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2003.09.018.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 14751102 (View on PubMed)

Low CK, Vartany A, Engstrom JW, Poncelet A, Diao E. Comparison of transthecal and subcutaneous single-injection digital block techniques. J Hand Surg Am. 1997 Sep;22(5):901-5. doi: 10.1016/S0363-5023(97)80088-3.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 9330152 (View on PubMed)

Morrison WG. Transthecal digital block. Arch Emerg Med. 1993 Mar;10(1):35-8. doi: 10.1136/emj.10.1.35.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 8452611 (View on PubMed)

Torok PJ, Flinn SD, Shin AY. Transthecal digital block at the proximal phalanx. J Hand Surg Br. 2001 Feb;26(1):69-71. doi: 10.1054/jhsb.2000.0519.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 11162023 (View on PubMed)

Hill RG Jr, Patterson JW, Parker JC, Bauer J, Wright E, Heller MB. Comparison of transthecal digital block and traditional digital block for anesthesia of the finger. Ann Emerg Med. 1995 May;25(5):604-7. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(95)70171-0.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 7741335 (View on PubMed)

Hollander JE, Valentine SM, Brogan GX Jr. Academic associate program: integrating clinical emergency medicine research with undergraduate education. Acad Emerg Med. 1997 Mar;4(3):225-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1997.tb03747.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 9063553 (View on PubMed)

Castellanos J, Ramirez C, De Sena L, Bertran C. Transthecal digital block: digital anaesthesia through the sheath of the flexor tendon. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000 Aug;82(6):889. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.82b6.10430.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 10990318 (View on PubMed)

Lewis L, Stephan M. Local and Regional Anesthesia. In: Henretig F, King C, eds. Pediatric Emergency Procedures. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1997.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Carlson D, et al. Illustrated Techniques of Pediatric Emergency Procedures. In: Fleisher G, Ludwig S, eds. Pediatric Emergency Medicine. Philadelphia: Williams and Wilkins, 2000.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Antevy PM, Zuckerbraun NS, Saladino RA, Pitetti RD. Evaluation of a transthecal digital nerve block in the injured pediatric patient. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2010 Mar;26(3):177-80. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e3181d1dfaf.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 20179662 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

2005-5-4319

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id