Comparison of Infiltration of 2% Lidocaine With and Without Needle as Analgesia in Epidural Needle Insertion
NCT ID: NCT05326867
Last Updated: 2022-04-27
Study Results
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.
COMPLETED
NA
84 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2021-11-01
2021-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
This study was a double blind randomized controlled trial. Data collection was carried out consecutively on 84 subjects with 42 subjects in each group of lidocaine infiltration without needles and lidocaine infiltration with 23G needles. The effectiveness of analgesia was assessed from three variables like pain with a Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) of 0 to 10 during lidocaine infiltration, pain with NPRS during epidural needle insertion, and patient movement during epidural needle insertion.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Vapocoolant Spray for Reducing the Pain of Spinal Needle Insertion
NCT03175913
Safety and Efficacy Study of an Iontophoretic Patch Containing Lidocaine and Epinephrine for Venipuncture in Healthy Adult Volunteers
NCT00889642
Comparison of Two Analgesic Pretreatment Techniques Before Spinal Needle Insertion for Pain Reduction and Maternal Satisfaction Level Assessment in Women Undergoing LSCS.
NCT04050059
A Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of a Microneedle Device for Local Anesthesia
NCT00539084
Empathy Through Pain Control: Lidocaine Paracervical Block for IUD Placements
NCT06960317
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Ramzi in his research found that the median Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) due to epidural needle insertion given lidocaine infiltration with a needle is 5 with a range of 0-10. Mogensen investigated differences in pain expectations and the actual pain experienced by the patient due to insertion of the Tuohy needle in epidural anesthesia infiltrated with lidocaine using a needle. The research found that the median Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for pain expectations was 5 while the NRS for actual pain experienced by patients was 2 (p value \< 0.0001). Infiltration of local anesthetic with the needle alone is painful. Gozdemir in his research found that the pain median due to infiltration lidocaine using the needle before insertion of the epidural needle was 2 with a range of 0 up to 4.
Several alternative methods have been developed to reduce the pain of local anesthetic infiltration prior to epidural needle insertion, such as: establishing good communication with the patient during the procedure, replacing local anesthetic agents with chloroprocaine, adding bicarbonate to make lidocaine pH close to physiological pH, cooling down the skin with cryoanalgesia, local anesthetic infiltration with a smaller needle (25-30 G needle), lidocaine patch, and Eutectic Mixtures of Local Aesthetics (EMLA). Some of these alternatives still perform needle punctures that can produce pain, although to a lesser degree, and 10% of the population have a needle phobia. Non-invasive alternatives such as EMLA or cryoanalgesia cannot be a thorough solution due to the depth of analgesia generated. A study stated that the depth from skin to lumbar epidural cavity in parturient is 2-9 cm with 89% being on the 3.5-7.5 cm intervals. In leaner patients, the depth of the lumbar epidural found at 2-4 cm. Whereas EMLA only provides analgesia in depth of 2.9-4.5 mm if EMLA is applied for 60-120 minutes and 6 mm if applied for 3-4 hours. While cryoanalgesia such as vapocoolants spray works as a temporary topical analgesia by cooling the skin thereby reducing the sensitivity of pain receptors.
Needle usage, the length of time it takes to produce analgesia, transient analgesia results, and lack of depth of analgesia are the problems to present an alternative to local anesthetic infiltration that is completely pain free and adequate. A needleless injection technology can be a solution to these problems. The medicinal liquid is injected by a tool with high speed and pressure through a smooth hole. This system is expected to make the analgesia condition can be achieved quickly, painlessly, and avoiding needle phobia
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
TRIPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Infiltration of 2% Lidocaine with Needle
Free needle infiltration of lidocaine can be an alternative to reduce epidural needle insertion pain. The study of Gozdemir et al. found that 10% lidocaine infiltration without needle was less painful than 2% lidocaine infiltration with a 27G needle with no significant difference in analgesia effect during epidural needle insertion. This study aimed to compare infiltration of lidocaine with and without needle for epidural needle insertion
Infiltration of 2% Lidocaine with Needle
Infiltration of 2% Lidocaine with Needle
Infiltration of 2% Lidocaine without Needle
Free needle infiltration of lidocaine can be an alternative to reduce epidural needle insertion pain. The study of Gozdemir et al. found that 10% lidocaine infiltration without needle was less painful than 2% lidocaine infiltration with a 27G needle with no significant difference in analgesia effect during epidural needle insertion. This study aimed to compare infiltration of lidocaine with and without needle for epidural needle insertion
Infiltration of 2% Lidocaine without Needle
Free needle infiltration of lidocaine can be an alternative to reduce epidural needle insertion pain. The study of Gozdemir et al. found that 10% lidocaine infiltration without needle was less painful than 2% lidocaine infiltration with a 27G needle with no significant difference in analgesia effect during epidural needle insertion. This study aimed to compare infiltration of lidocaine with and without needle for epidural needle insertion
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Infiltration of 2% Lidocaine with Needle
Infiltration of 2% Lidocaine with Needle
Infiltration of 2% Lidocaine without Needle
Free needle infiltration of lidocaine can be an alternative to reduce epidural needle insertion pain. The study of Gozdemir et al. found that 10% lidocaine infiltration without needle was less painful than 2% lidocaine infiltration with a 27G needle with no significant difference in analgesia effect during epidural needle insertion. This study aimed to compare infiltration of lidocaine with and without needle for epidural needle insertion
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Patients aged 19 to 65 years
* Patients with American Society of Anaesthesiologist (ASA) criteria 1 to 3
* Willing to participate and signing the agreement
Exclusion Criteria
* Epidural anesthesia is contraindicated
* Patients with a history of local anesthetic allergy
* The patient who cannot sit or feels pain when in a sitting position
18 Years
65 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Indonesia University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Raden Besthadi Sukmono
Anesthesiologist
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Raden B Sukmono
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Indonesia University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
RSUPN Cipto Mangunkusumo
Jakarta, , Indonesia
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
IF
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.