Suppr超能文献

氯乙烷用于手部注射的应用与效果

Use and Effectiveness of Ethyl Chloride for Hand Injections.

作者信息

Franko Orrin I, Stern Peter J

机构信息

East Bay Hand Medical Center, San Leandro, CA.

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.

出版信息

J Hand Surg Am. 2017 Mar;42(3):175-181.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2016.12.013.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Limited literature supports using ethyl chloride topical spray as an anesthetic for hand injections whereas documented risks include frostbite, skin irritation, and inhalation toxicity. We hypothesize that ethyl chloride spray imparts no benefit to patients' perception of pain or anxiety for routine hand injections.

METHODS

We first surveyed all members of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand to discern the prevalence of ethyl chloride use during routine injections. We then performed a prospective, randomized, study at 2 institutions evaluating the efficacy of ethyl chloride spray compared with "routine injection" (no topical spray) in patients indicated for a hand injection. All patients completed a pre- and postinjection 11-point questionnaire that inquired about various components of pain and anxiety.

RESULTS

A total of 2,083 (73% response rate) American Society for Surgery of the Hand members responded to the survey and revealed that 59% of hand surgeons always or often use ethyl chloride, and 24% never use it. There were no differences for region or practice setting, but experienced surgeons were less likely to routinely use ethyl chloride (35%) compared with younger surgeons (66%). Among 151 patients participating in the clinical study (75 with ethyl chloride), there were no differences for any outcome measure assessed. Injection pain in the spray and no-spray groups, pain after 1 minute, and overall anxiety were equivalent. Subgroup analysis demonstrated no effect of sex, anticipated anxiety, or pain threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

Ethyl chloride is widely used among hand surgeons but imparts no benefit for routine hand injections in the clinical setting. The potential risks and costs of ethyl chloride use may outweigh its benefits.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic II.

摘要

目的

仅有有限的文献支持将氯乙烷局部喷雾用作手部注射的麻醉剂,而已记录的风险包括冻伤、皮肤刺激和吸入毒性。我们推测,对于常规手部注射,氯乙烷喷雾并不能减轻患者的疼痛感知或焦虑情绪。

方法

我们首先对美国手外科协会的所有成员进行了调查,以了解常规注射过程中使用氯乙烷的普遍性。然后,我们在2家机构进行了一项前瞻性随机研究,评估氯乙烷喷雾与“常规注射”(不使用局部喷雾)相比,对需要进行手部注射的患者的疗效。所有患者在注射前和注射后都完成了一份11分的问卷,问卷询问了疼痛和焦虑的各个方面。

结果

共有2083名(回复率73%)美国手外科协会成员回复了调查,结果显示59%的手外科医生总是或经常使用氯乙烷,24%的医生从不使用。在地区或执业环境方面没有差异,但经验丰富的外科医生(35%)比年轻外科医生(66%)更不太可能常规使用氯乙烷。在参与临床研究的151名患者中(75名使用氯乙烷),所评估的任何结果指标均无差异。喷雾组和无喷雾组的注射疼痛、1分钟后的疼痛以及总体焦虑程度相当。亚组分析表明,性别、预期焦虑或疼痛阈值均无影响。

结论

氯乙烷在手外科医生中广泛使用,但在临床环境中对常规手部注射并无益处。使用氯乙烷的潜在风险和成本可能超过其益处。

研究类型/证据水平:治疗性II级。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验