Introduction of Sprotte needles to a single-centre acute neurology service: before and after study

OBJECTIVES: To introduce atraumatic (Sprotte) lumbar puncture needles and compare complication rates with traumatic (Quincke) needles. DESIGN: Complication rates associated with traumatic needle use were retrospectively analysed over a four-week period. Atraumatic needles were then implemented and a prospective analysis of the complication rates was undertaken for a further six weeks. SETTING: A single-centre acute neurology unit in a London teaching hospital PARTICIPANTS: Traumatic needles (n = 24 patients); atraumatic needles (n = 36 patients) MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Headache rates, use of over-the-counter medications, further medical assistance, time off work, nausea and vomiting, traumatic taps (as per the count of red blood cells per millilitre in the first sample of cerebrospinal fluid [CSF]) and back pain. RESULTS: A comparison of traumatic and atraumatic needles revealed a significant reduction in the incidence of post-lumbar puncture headaches (*P < 0.01), headaches requiring over-the-counter medication (*P < 0.00001), need for further medical assistance (*P < 0.006), time off work (*P < 0.003), nausea and vomiting (*P < 0.01) and traumatic taps as per the count of red blood cells per millilitre in the first sample of CSF (*P < 0.02). There was no significant difference in the incidence of back pain (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Most complication outcomes are significantly lower with the use of atraumatic lumbar puncture needles. We present for the first time in the literature that the rate of ‘traumatic taps’ are significantly lower with atraumatic needles. The implementation of atraumatic needles in an acute neurology service is safe and produces reliable, reproducible results in keeping with previously published randomized controlled trials.