Cargando…

Circumferential periosteal block versus hematoma block for the reduction of distal radius and ulna fractures: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE: To assess the analgesic efficacy of the circumferential periosteal block (CPB) and compare it with the conventional fracture hematoma block (HB). METHODS: This study was a prospective single-center randomized controlled trial performed in a national orthopedic hospital. Fifty patients with...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lari, Ali, Jarragh, Ali, Alherz, Mohammad, Nouri, Abdullah, Behbehani, Mousa, Alnusif, Naser
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9925527/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35982326
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-022-02078-8
_version_ 1784888082757058560
author Lari, Ali
Jarragh, Ali
Alherz, Mohammad
Nouri, Abdullah
Behbehani, Mousa
Alnusif, Naser
author_facet Lari, Ali
Jarragh, Ali
Alherz, Mohammad
Nouri, Abdullah
Behbehani, Mousa
Alnusif, Naser
author_sort Lari, Ali
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To assess the analgesic efficacy of the circumferential periosteal block (CPB) and compare it with the conventional fracture hematoma block (HB). METHODS: This study was a prospective single-center randomized controlled trial performed in a national orthopedic hospital. Fifty patients with displaced distal radius (with or without concomitant ulna) fractures requiring reduction were randomized to receive either CPB or HB prior to the reduction. Pain was sequentially measured using the visual analogue scale (VAS) across three stages; before administration of local anesthesia (baseline), during administration (injection) and during manipulation and immobilization (manipulation). Further, the effect of demographic factors on the severity of pain was analyzed in multivariate regression. Finally, complications and end outcomes were compared across both techniques. RESULTS: Patients receiving CPB experienced significantly less pain scores during manipulation (VAS = 0.64) compared with HB (VAS = 2.44) (p =  < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between groups at baseline (P = 0.55) and injection (P = 0.40) stages. CONCLUSION: The CPB provides a superior analgesic effect over the conventional HB with no documented complications in either technique. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00068-022-02078-8.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9925527
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99255272023-02-15 Circumferential periosteal block versus hematoma block for the reduction of distal radius and ulna fractures: a randomized controlled trial Lari, Ali Jarragh, Ali Alherz, Mohammad Nouri, Abdullah Behbehani, Mousa Alnusif, Naser Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Original Article PURPOSE: To assess the analgesic efficacy of the circumferential periosteal block (CPB) and compare it with the conventional fracture hematoma block (HB). METHODS: This study was a prospective single-center randomized controlled trial performed in a national orthopedic hospital. Fifty patients with displaced distal radius (with or without concomitant ulna) fractures requiring reduction were randomized to receive either CPB or HB prior to the reduction. Pain was sequentially measured using the visual analogue scale (VAS) across three stages; before administration of local anesthesia (baseline), during administration (injection) and during manipulation and immobilization (manipulation). Further, the effect of demographic factors on the severity of pain was analyzed in multivariate regression. Finally, complications and end outcomes were compared across both techniques. RESULTS: Patients receiving CPB experienced significantly less pain scores during manipulation (VAS = 0.64) compared with HB (VAS = 2.44) (p =  < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between groups at baseline (P = 0.55) and injection (P = 0.40) stages. CONCLUSION: The CPB provides a superior analgesic effect over the conventional HB with no documented complications in either technique. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00068-022-02078-8. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-08-18 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9925527/ /pubmed/35982326 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-022-02078-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Lari, Ali
Jarragh, Ali
Alherz, Mohammad
Nouri, Abdullah
Behbehani, Mousa
Alnusif, Naser
Circumferential periosteal block versus hematoma block for the reduction of distal radius and ulna fractures: a randomized controlled trial
title Circumferential periosteal block versus hematoma block for the reduction of distal radius and ulna fractures: a randomized controlled trial
title_full Circumferential periosteal block versus hematoma block for the reduction of distal radius and ulna fractures: a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Circumferential periosteal block versus hematoma block for the reduction of distal radius and ulna fractures: a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Circumferential periosteal block versus hematoma block for the reduction of distal radius and ulna fractures: a randomized controlled trial
title_short Circumferential periosteal block versus hematoma block for the reduction of distal radius and ulna fractures: a randomized controlled trial
title_sort circumferential periosteal block versus hematoma block for the reduction of distal radius and ulna fractures: a randomized controlled trial
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9925527/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35982326
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-022-02078-8
work_keys_str_mv AT lariali circumferentialperiostealblockversushematomablockforthereductionofdistalradiusandulnafracturesarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT jarraghali circumferentialperiostealblockversushematomablockforthereductionofdistalradiusandulnafracturesarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT alherzmohammad circumferentialperiostealblockversushematomablockforthereductionofdistalradiusandulnafracturesarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT nouriabdullah circumferentialperiostealblockversushematomablockforthereductionofdistalradiusandulnafracturesarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT behbehanimousa circumferentialperiostealblockversushematomablockforthereductionofdistalradiusandulnafracturesarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT alnusifnaser circumferentialperiostealblockversushematomablockforthereductionofdistalradiusandulnafracturesarandomizedcontrolledtrial