Comparison of Two Techniques of IV Lidocaine on Propofol Injection Pain
NCT ID: NCT03057704
Last Updated: 2018-09-10
Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
PHASE4
50 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2016-12-05
2017-01-20
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Comparison of Three Different Strategies to Prevent Propofol Induced Pain During Infusion
NCT00146926
Assessment of Pain on Propofol Injection.
NCT04673500
Patient-Titrated Automated Intermittent Boluses of Local Anesthetic vs. a Continuous Infusion Via a Perineural Catheter for Postoperative Analgesia
NCT05091905
Preventing Propofol-associated Injection Pain
NCT00864682
Low-Dose Lidocaine Infusion for Acute Pain Management Pilot Study
NCT06725485
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Methods and Measures
Design This was conducted as a randomized controlled trial of two methods of administering lidocaine prior to propofol injection.
Setting The study setting was located within North Carolina Baptist Health, an academic medical center, in the Endoscopy Suite or Outpatient Surgery Center where subjects were scheduled to receive propofol as part of their sedation or anesthetic.
Sample Size The investigators estimated that 25 subjects in each of the two groups was required to test the hypothesis based on prior studies.
Interventions and Interactions
The investigators used two groups:
* Group 1: 50mg of 2% lidocaine given just prior to the propofol dose through the IV line.
* Group 2: 50mg of 2% lidocaine given IV with venous occlusion applied when the patient is positioned on the operating room table and timed until the onset of propofol administration. The tourniquet the investigators used was a Quick Release tourniquet applied to the forearm 10cm distal to the elbow joint in the tourniquet group. Venous stasis was confirmed with cessation of flow from hanging IV fluid.
For both groups, no premedication was given, which is the normal practice for these procedures. Study procedures involved placing a 20 gauge intravenous (IV) catheter in a vein distal to the mid forearm. Venous occlusion was achieved by either a latex free tourniquet or McKesson Quick Release tourniquet applied to the forearm 10cm distal to the elbow joint. Tourniquet pressure was somewhat variable but sufficient to cause venous stasis as confirmed by no flow of hanging IV fluid. Injections were delivered at roughly 1 ml/sec.
Schedule of events in the study (all performed by 1 of the 2 investigators:
* Day of procedure: holding area
* Consent subject for study participation
* Randomly assign patient to one of two groups
* Day of procedure: procedure area
-Accompany subject to the operating or procedure room, perform protocol from the group to which the subjects were assigned, while noting outcome measures such as self-described discomfort and observer graded discomfort
* Day of procedure: recovery area
-Revisit subject in recovery 30 minutes after their procedure to determine post-procedure recall of discomfort
* Post-study period
* Analyze data
Analytical Plan The investigators will analyze results initially using descriptive statistics. Comparison between groups was done using chi square tests for proportions, and t-tests or ANOVA procedures for continuous variables. Regression analysis was performed to identify independent outcome predictors. Other inferential statistical analysis was conducted as appropriate.
Informed Consent One of the two investigators obtained signed informed consent from each subject. This was performed in the holding room prior to the procedure since most subjects had their pre-procedure examination performed in the holding room and were not seen prior to the day of their procedure.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Intravenous lidocaine: flushed
Lidocaine injection flushed
Lidocaine injection flushed
The investigator administers IV lidocaine and flushes it into the subject prior to administering propofol.
Intravenous lidocaine: tourniquet
Lidocaine injection tourniquet
Lidocaine injection tourniquet
Intravenous lidocaine: tourniquet
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Lidocaine injection flushed
The investigator administers IV lidocaine and flushes it into the subject prior to administering propofol.
Lidocaine injection tourniquet
Intravenous lidocaine: tourniquet
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Cases must be schedule to have a duration less than 60 minutes.
Exclusion Criteria
* Subjects are excluded if they require intravenous medications prior to the study period
18 Years
80 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Wake Forest University Health Sciences
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Timothy N Harwood, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Wake Forest University Health Sciences
Patrick Grace, MD
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Wake Forest University Health Sciences
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
North Carolina Baptist Hospital
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Study Protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan, and Informed Consent Form
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
IRB00040756
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.