Needle-Free Delivery of Lidocaine
single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebocontrolled, single-dose, parallel-group study
Needle-Free Delivery of Lidocaine
single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebocontrolled, single-dose, parallel-group study
Die Anwendung des nadelfreien Injektors zur Feldblock-, Ringblock- oder Leitungsanästhesie.
J Turk Anaesth Int Care 2010; 38(2):122-128
The Efficacy of Needle-free Injection System (INJEX®) in Relieving the Pain of Spinal Needle Insertion
Summary
Aim: INJEX® is a needle-free drug delivery system mainly developed for vaccination and insulin applications. It has been successfully used in various anesthesia procedures. This study was designed to compare the effects of local anesthesia application with INJEX®, a needle free injection system or with dental needle on relieving pain associated with spinal needle insertion and relevant patient satisfaction.
Material and Methods: Sixty patients scheduled for surgical operations under spinal anesthesia were randomly allocated to two groups. Prior to spinal anesthesia, spinal needle insertion area was infiltrated with 1.5 mL of 2 % lidocaine using 27 gauge dental needle in Group 1 and 0.3 mL, 2 % lidocaine by needle-free injection system (INJEX® model 210) in Group 2. Pain intensities during local anesthetic application and spinal needle insertion were assessed immediately after each procedure by visual analogue scale (VAS). Patient satisfaction in each group was also compared on a 4-point scale.
Results: Pain scores measured during local anesthesia administration were significantly lower in the INJEX® group than in the dental needle injection group (p=0.001). No significant difference was found between two groups as for pain scores during spinal needle insertion (p=0.382). Patient satisfaction was found to be higher with INJEX® with a limited significance (p=0,049).
Conclusion: INJEX® is an effective alternative to dental needle for lidocaine infiltration during the administration of spinal anesthesia with less pain and higher patient satisfaction.
BY: Hüseyin Sert, Bünyamin Muslu, Burhanettin Usta, Muhammet Gözdemir, Rüveyda İrem Demircioğlu
Fatih Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Anesteziyoloji ve Reanimasyon Anabilim Dalı
Unsere Patienten stehen stets im Mittelpunkt unserer Tätigkeit. Zur schmerzarmen Lokalanästhesie in besonders empfindlichen Bereichen verwenden wir INJEX - Die Spritze ohne Nadel.
Dr. med. Martin Ruhnke
Arzt für Frauenheilkunde u. Geburtshilfe
Onkologische Schwerpunktpraxis
Bergmannstraße 5
10961 Berlin
184(3):978-83.
Department of Sexual Medicine, Yijishan Hospital-Wannan Medical College, Wuhu, People's Republic of China.
PURPOSE: We used a local anesthetic jet injection technique for adult male circumcision. This method eliminates needle use and may decrease the fear of local anesthetic injection used for male circumcision.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We recruited 60 men seeking voluntary adult male circumcision into the study from June to September 2009. We used a MadaJet Medical Injector to deliver a high pressure spray of 0.1 ml 2% plain lidocaine solution directly through the penile skin circumferentially around the proximal third of the penis. All men underwent circumcision using the Shang Ring and were evaluated for anesthetic safety, efficacy and acceptability. Pain was measured on a visual analog scale.
RESULTS: The average volume of 2% lidocaine anesthetic solution delivered by jet injection was 0.1 ml with a mean total of 0.9 ml per circumcision procedure. More than 85% of men did not require supplemental anesthesia. Anesthetic onset required approximately 45 seconds from the time that injections were completed. Mean pain scores for immediate postoperative, 24-hour postoperative, ring removal and post-ring removal events were 0.1, 6.8, 2.2 and 0.9, respectively. In 4 patients (6.67%) mild urethral bleeding resolved with pressure, resulting in technique modification.
CONCLUSIONS: No-needle jet injection is safe and effective for adult MC. The technique efficiently delivers local anesthesia with rapid onset in men undergoing circumcision. This needle-free approach may enhance the popularity of adult male circumcision.
2010 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PMID: 20643441 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
38(10): E572-6.
Department of Oral Surgery, Implantology, and Roentgenology, Dental School, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece. nikosd@dent.auth.gr
OBJECTIVES: To clinically evaluate the jet injection Injex (Rösch AG Medizintechnik) using 2 different anesthetic solutions, and to compare the jet injection and the standard needle injection techniques.
METHOD AND MATERIALS: Of the 32 patients in the study, 10 received mepivacaine 3% anesthetic solution by means of the jet injection technique, while the remaining 22 patients received lidocaine 2% with epinephrine 1:80,000 by the same method. The 14 patients in whom pulp anesthesia was achieved were selected for an additional evaluation of the pulp reaction using standard needle injection anesthesia. The differences between the 2 compounds with Injex were statistically evaluated by means of independent-samples t test analysis. The differences between subgroups receiving both jet injection and needle injection anesthesia were evaluated by means of paired t test analysis.
RESULTS: The administration of mepivacaine 3% using Injex did not achieve pulp anesthesia in any of the 10 patients, although the soft tissue anesthesia was successful. The administration of lidocaine with epinephrine using Injex resulted in pulp anesthesia in only 14 patients; soft tissue anesthesia was observed in all patients of this group. There was no statistically significant difference between Injex and the needle injection technique in onset of anesthesia. However, the duration of anesthesia was significantly longer for the needle infiltration group than for the Injex injection group.
CONCLUSION: The anesthetic solution should be combined with a vasoconstriction agent when the Injex technique is implemented.
PMID: 18197315 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Die Anwendung des nadelfreien Injektors zur Feldblock-, Ringblock- oder Leitungsanästhesie.
Anwendungsbericht Venenpunktion
Anwendungsbericht zur Applikation von Lokalanästhetika vor Venenpunktionen mit INJEX 30
Needle-Free Delivery of Lidocaine
single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebocontrolled, single-dose, parallel-group study