Ballard Ariane, Khadra Christelle, Fortin Olivier, Guingo Estelle, Trottier Evelyne D, Bailey Benoit, Poonai Naveen, Le May Sylvie
Faculty of Nursing Université de Montréal Montréal Quebec Canada.
CHU Sainte-Justine Research Centre Montréal Quebec Canada.
Paediatr Neonatal Pain. 2024 Jun 22;6(4):164-173. doi: 10.1002/pne2.12125. eCollection 2024 Dec.
The use of a rapid, easy-to-use intervention could improve needle-related procedural pain management practices in the context of the Emergency Department (ED). As such, the Buzzy device seems to be a promising alternative to topical anesthetics. The aim of this study was to determine if a cold vibrating device was non-inferior to a topical anesthetic cream for pain management in children undergoing needle-related procedures in the ED. In this randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, we enrolled children between 4 and 17 years presenting to the ED and requiring a needle-related procedure. Participants were randomly assigned to either the cold vibrating device or topical anesthetic (4% liposomal lidocaine; standard of care). The primary outcome was the mean difference (MD) in adjusted procedural pain intensity on the 0-10 Color Analogue Scale (CAS), using a non-inferiority margin of 0.70. A total of 352 participants were randomized (cold vibration device = 176, topical anesthetic cream = 176). Adjusted procedural pain scores' MD between groups was 0.56 (95% CI:-0.08-1.20) on the CAS, showing that the cold vibrating device was not considered non-inferior to topical anesthetic. The cold vibrating device was not considered non-inferior to the topical anesthetic cream for pain management in children during a needle-related procedure in the ED. As topical anesthetic creams require an application time of 30 min, cost approximately CAD $40.00 per tube, are underused in the ED setting, the cold vibrating device remains a promising alternative as it is a rapid, easy-to-use, and reusable device.
在急诊科(ED)的环境中,使用一种快速、易于使用的干预措施可以改善与针头相关的操作疼痛管理实践。因此,Buzzy设备似乎是局部麻醉剂的一种有前景的替代品。本研究的目的是确定在急诊科接受与针头相关操作的儿童中,一种冷振动设备在疼痛管理方面是否不劣于局部麻醉乳膏。在这项随机对照非劣效性试验中,我们纳入了4至17岁到急诊科就诊且需要进行与针头相关操作的儿童。参与者被随机分配到冷振动设备组或局部麻醉剂组(4%脂质体利多卡因;护理标准)。主要结局是在0至10的颜色模拟量表(CAS)上调整后的操作疼痛强度的平均差(MD),非劣效性界限为0.70。共有352名参与者被随机分组(冷振动设备组 = 176名,局部麻醉乳膏组 = 176名) 在CAS上,两组之间调整后的操作疼痛评分MD为0.56(95%置信区间:-0.08至1.20),表明冷振动设备不被认为不劣于局部麻醉剂。在急诊科儿童进行与针头相关的操作时,冷振动设备在疼痛管理方面不被认为不劣于局部麻醉乳膏。由于局部麻醉乳膏需要涂抹30分钟,每管成本约为40加元,在急诊科环境中使用不足,冷振动设备仍然是一种有前景的替代品,因为它是一种快速、易于使用且可重复使用的设备。