ArticlePDF AvailableLiterature Review

How to Minimize the Pain of Local Anesthetic Injection for Wide Awake Surgery

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

After reading this article, the participant should be able to (1) almost painlessly inject tumescent local anesthesia to anesthetize small or large parts of the body, (2) improve surgical safety by eliminating the need for unnecessary sedation in patients with multiple medical comorbidities, and (3) convert many limb and face operations to wide awake surgery. We recommend the following 13 tips to minimize the pain of local anesthesia injection: (1) buffer local anesthetic with sodium bicarbonate; (2) use smaller 27- or 30-gauge needles; (3) immobilize the syringe with two hands and have your thumb ready on the plunger before inserting the needle; (4) use more than one type of sensory noise when inserting needles into the skin; (5) try to insert the needle at 90 degrees; (6) do not inject in the dermis, but in the fat just below it; (7) inject at least 2 ml slowly just under the dermis before moving the needle at all and inject all local anesthetic slowly when you start to advance the needle; (8) never advance sharp needle tips anywhere that is not yet numb; (9) always inject from proximal to distal relative to nerves; (10) use blunt-tipped cannulas when tumescing large areas; (11) only reinsert needles into skin that is already numb when injecting large areas; (12) always ask patients to tell you every time they feel pain during the whole injection process so that you can score yourself and improve with each injection; (13) always inject too much volume instead of not enough volume to eliminate surgery pain and the need for "top ups."
www.PRSGlobalOpen.com 1
INTRODUCTION
If you were a patient, would you prefer your local anes-
thetic injector to be a pain-inducing torturer or a magician
who hardly hurts you at all? The purpose of this article is
to help doctors and nurse injectors be the latter. The last
article the senior author wrote on this subject laid out very
reproducible tips and tricks to minimize the pain of local
anesthesia injection.1 Those techniques have enabled many
medical students and residents2 to reliably inject “hole in
one” local anesthesia.3 This means that all the patient feels
is one little sting from the rst poke of a small needle, even
when anesthetizing a large area. The purpose of this article
is also to update injectors on improvements in the hole in
one technique over the last 7 years.
Why is it important to have almost pain-free local anes-
thetic injection and surgery? Because the two main rea-
sons patients feel they need sedation are (1) the possible
pain of local anesthesia injection and (2) the chance that
surgery might hurt because of inadequate local anesthe-
sia. Both concerns can be reliably eliminated by following
the simple tips of this article.4 Avoiding sedation elimi-
nates nausea and vomiting, unnecessary anesthetic risks,
costs, hospital admissions, and the main operating room
environment.5–7 Pure local anesthesia is safer than seda-
tion in patients with multiple medical comorbidities. Wide
awake surgery makes it more affordable and grants access
to millions of the worlds’ poor patients who currently can-
not afford sedative surgery in the main operating room.8
Tumescent means a large enough volume of dilute
local anesthesia that you can see it and feel it inating
all tissues where sharp objects or broken bones will be
Related Digital Media are available in the full-text
version of the article on www.PRSGlobalOpen.com.
Disclosure: The authors have no nancial interest to declare
in relation to the content of this article. This study did not
receive any funding.
Hand/Peripheral Nerve
From the* Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Dalhousie
University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada; and †Division of
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Dalhousie University, Saint
John, New Brunswick, Canada.
Received for publication February 27, 2021; accepted April 8,
2021.
Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health,
Inc. on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons. This
is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0
(CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the
work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in
any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000003730
Nadim Joukhadar, MD*
Donald Lalonde, MD, MSC,
FRCSC
Summary: After reading this article, the participant should be able to (1) almost
painlessly inject tumescent local anesthesia to anesthetize small or large parts of
the body, (2) improve surgical safety by eliminating the need for unnecessary seda-
tion in patients with multiple medical comorbidities, and (3) convert many limb
and face operations to wide awake surgery. We recommend the following 13 tips
to minimize the pain of local anesthesia injection: (1) buffer local anesthetic with
sodium bicarbonate; (2) use smaller 27- or 30-gauge needles; (3) immobilize the
syringe with two hands and have your thumb ready on the plunger before inserting
the needle; (4) use more than one type of sensory noise when inserting needles
into the skin; (5) try to insert the needle at 90 degrees; (6) do not inject in the
dermis, but in the fat just below it; (7) inject at least 2 ml slowly just under the
dermis before moving the needle at all and inject all local anesthetic slowly when
you start to advance the needle; (8) never advance sharp needle tips anywhere
that is not yet numb; (9) always inject from proximal to distal relative to nerves;
(10) use blunt-tipped cannulas when tumescing large areas; (11) only reinsert
needles into skin that is already numb when injecting large areas; (12) always ask
patients to tell you every time they feel pain during the whole injection process
so that you can score yourself and improve with each injection; (13) always inject
too much volume instead of not enough volume to eliminate surgery pain and
the need for “top ups.” (Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2021;9:e3730; doi: 10.1097/
GOX.0000000000003730; Published online 4 August 2021.)
How to Minimize the Pain of Local Anesthetic
Injection for Wide Awake Surgery
LWW
REVIEW ARTICLE
PRS Global Open 2021
2
manipulated. Nerve decompression such as carpal tun-
nel,9 cubital tunnel,10 and lacertus release11 are routinely
performed with wide awake local anesthesia no tourniquet
(WALANT). The results of forearm tendon transfers,12
exor tendon repairs,13,14 tendon grafts,15 and tenolysis16
can all be improved because surgeons can see comfortable
awake patients move the reconstructed tendons during
the surgery. In the head and neck, blepharoplasty,17 rhytid-
ectomy, and skin cancer reconstruction such as forehead
aps can readily be accomplished safely without sedation.
Surgeons can educate unsedated patients during the pro-
cedure to reduce the chances of postoperative complica-
tions.18 Eliminating sedation also simplies and improves
safety in many procedures in emergency rooms.
Minimal pain tumescent local anesthesia injection has
also been used in wide awake internal xation of fractures
of metacarpals,19 distal radius,20,21 elbows,22 clavicles,23 and
ankles.10 When anesthetising long bones for plate xation,
the entire periosteal surface of fracture, screw, or K wire
penetration of the cortex must also be bathed with local
anesthetic solution.
Perhaps the most important reason to avoid unneces-
sary pain with local anesthetic injection and wide awake
surgery is that it is the right thing to do. Here are 13 ways
that work well to achieve the goal.
1. Buffer Local Anesthetic with Sodium Bicarbonate
We prefer to use premixed 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000
epinephrine. However, its pH has been shown to be approx-
imately 4.2, which is roughly 1000 times more acidic than
the body pH of 7.4. This is why it stings when it is injected
without buffer. We add 1.0 ml of 8.4% sodium bicarbonate to
every 10 ml of local anesthetic to decrease the acidic sting.24–27
Refrigerated local anesthetics hurt more than room-
temperature solutions.28 Some British hospitals keep their
lidocaine and epinephrine refrigerated so that it lasts lon-
ger. We store at room temperature and adhere to labeled
expiration dates.
2. Use Smaller 27- or 30-gauge Needles
Smaller needles hurt less than larger needles.29–32 We
recommend the use of smaller 27-gauge (0.4 mm) or
30-gauge (0.3 mm) needles for injection, instead of 25
gauge or larger needles. Tinier needles also force the
injector to slow down the local anesthetic injection speed
because of increased resistance. We start most of our injec-
tions with a 30-gauge half-inch needle on a 3-ml syringe,
and then switch to a 27-gauge 1.25-inch needle on a 10-ml
syringe for the rest of the injections.
All hospitals have a designated person who orders
needles from commercial sources. Find that designated
person and ask her to “check the box” that buys 27- and
30-gauge needles the next time she is ordering. The same
goes for ordering premixed lidocaine with epinephrine
instead of plain lidocaine without epinephrine.
3. Immobilize the Syringe with Two Hands and Have Your
Thumb Ready on the Plunger before Inserting the Needle
The senior author has been injected by residents
well over 80 times as the rst volunteer for many local
anesthetic studies. He has felt every little needle move-
ment or wobble until the needle penetration site is numb
(Fig. 4.)33 This is why we immobilize the syringe with
two stabilized hands and have our thumb ready on the
plunger before inserting the needle (Fig.1). We want zero
needle movement in the skin until it is completely numb.
Importantly, the hand holding the syringe should not be
free in the air, where it is likely to move around before the
needle site is numb.
4. Use More Than One Type of Sensory Noise When
Inserting Needles into Skin
Our favorite technique is pinching loose skin up into
the needle instead of inserting the needle down into the
skin (Figs.2–3). (See Video 1 [online], which displays sen-
sory noise. This illustrates examples of pinching the skin
into the needle, inserting needle at mid deep inspiration,
and maintaining pinch till sting is all gone.)
This creates the sensory noises of pinch, movement,
and pressure, which all decrease the volume of the pain
sound that the brain hears. Maintain the pressure of the
pinch until the patient tells you the needle sting is all gone.
We also tell the patients “I will count to 3. When I get to 2,
take a nice deep breath. When I get to 3 try not to move
when you might feel a little sting. If you move, the needle
Fig. 1. Stabilize the syringe with both hands, thumb ready on the
plunger so that the patient does not feel every little wobble of pain-
ful needle movement before the needle entry site is numbed, which
can take up to 60 seconds. Reproduced with permission from Plast
Reconstr Surg. 2013;132:675–684.
Joukhadar and Lalonde Minimizing Local Anesthetic Injection Pain
3
might come out and might have to sting you twice because
I need to put it back in.” Inserting the needle at the mid
point of the deep inspiration is good extra sensory noise.
If there is no loose skin, press very rmly with a nger
just proximal to where the needle goes in until the sting is
gone. These simple tricks, along with a 30-gauge needle,
will often result in a “hole in zero” where the patient does
not feel any pain at all with needle insertion.
Other forms of sensory noise include vibration,34
ice,35,36 music, movies, and virtual reality.37,38 Ask patients
to look away because watching the needle insertion may
worsen the patient experience.39 Topical local anesthetics
are effective in the mucosa, but less so in the imperme-
able skin. They may numb the upper dermis, but they take
a long time to work and do not numb the lower dermis
and supercial fat.40 (See Video 2 [online], which displays
sensory noise carpal tunnel surgery injection hole in one.
When there is not a lot of loose skin, like for the rst injec-
tion for carpal tunnel surgery, press very rmly with a
nger just proximal to the needle insertion site and keep
pressing rmly until the patient no longer feels the sting
of the needle entry site.)
5. Try to Insert the Needle at 90 Degrees Perpendicular to
the Skin
Most skin pain bers are in the dermis. To compare
nerves to trees, the many “leaves” are in the dermis,
Fig. 2. Sensory noise. Pinch the skin up into the needle instead of
pushing the needle down into the skin. Pinch the skin just proximal
(relative to nerve origin) to where the needle enters the skin.
Fig. 3. Good technique. Pinch the skin rmly just proximal to the
needle insertion site. Pinch the skin into the needle instead of push-
ing the needle into the skin. The thumb is ready on the plunger. Both
hands are stabilized to immobilize the needle after entry, so that the
patient does not feel it moving before the needle site is numbed.
Fig. 4. Poor technique. Holding the syringe with only one unstabilized
hand that can move in space has the patient feeling every little side to
side needle movement until the needle site is numb. Needle depth is
also not constant as it keeps moving in and out. The thumb is not ready
to go on the plunger; so the patient will feel the injector move the needle
as he fumbles to get his thumb on the plunger. There is no sensory noise
such as pinching the skin proximal to the needle entry site in this image.
Fig. 5. Do insert the needle perpendicular to the skin to decrease
the number of sensory nerve bers irritated by the needle.
PRS Global Open 2021
4
whereas the fewer “branches and trunks” are in subder-
mal fat. The injector is less likely to pierce “pain leaves”
with perpendicular entry into the skin instead of going
in obliquely (45 degrees) or parallel (<45 degrees) across
many leaves of the tree (Figs.5, 6).41,42
6. Do Not Inject in the Dermis, But in Fat Just Below It
Because nerve endings are concentrated in the der-
mis, intradermal injections are more painful than sub-
dermal injections (Fig.7).43 With an open wound such as
a laceration, you can avoid putting the needle through
sensitive skin altogether. Instead of going through the
skin, inject directly into the subcutaneous fat of the open
wound where the trunks and branches of the nerve trees
are, so that you avoid hurting the many nerves in the
skin with transcutaneous needle insertion. As soon as
your needle bevel is in the fat, begin slowly injecting until
you see tissues swell, and then stop advancing the needle
but continue injecting until tissues are very swollen and
numb.
7. Inject At Least 2 ml Slowly Just under the Dermis before
Moving the Needle At All (Fig.8)
It takes 15–60 seconds for the needle entry site to get
numb after penetration. Right after needle penetration,
always ask patients to tell you when they no longer feel the
needle in the skin. Until they do, keep it perfectly still like a
mosquito keeps his mouth’s six needle stylets immobile after
they enter your skin. When the needle sting is all gone, you
can inject just a little faster until you get at least 2 ml under
the skin before you even think of moving the needle. A com-
mon mistake is to assume the needle skin is numb and just
start moving the needle soon after you get under the skin.
8. Never Advance Sharp Needle Tips Anywhere That is Not
Yet Numb
Do not advance sharp needle tips into areas not yet
numbed (Fig.9). Always use a nger of your other hand
to palpate ahead of the needle tip so that you can both
feel and see where the local anesthesia is swelling the tis-
sue around the needle tip (Fig.10). Always make sure to
have at least 1–2 cm of local anesthesia ahead of where
you are advancing sharp needle point. You never want to
move your sharp needle tip into an area that is not numb.
Move the needle very slowly while injecting antegrade. It
Fig. 6. Do not insert the needle from 45 degrees to parallel to the
skin because it hurts more.
Fig. 7. Do not inject into the dermis because it hurts more.
Fig. 8. Do inject at least 2 ml of local anesthesia slowly into the fat
just below the skin before moving the needle at all. Reproduced
with permission from Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;132:675–684.
Joukhadar and Lalonde Minimizing Local Anesthetic Injection Pain
5
is not necessary to draw back on the plunger as minute
volumes of intravascular lidocaine and epinephrine are
not harmful. Anesthesiologists inject 1 mg/kg of lidocaine
slowly intravenously for pain control in some postopera-
tive patients.44 The intravascular half-life of epinephrine
is only 1.7 minutes.45 You are not likely to inject intrave-
nously in tumesced fat ahead of the needle in any case.
9. Always Inject from Proximal to Distal
Nerves branch in a proximal-to-distal manner. Injecting
proximal to distal increases the likelihood of proximal nerve
blockade.46 However, the goal of tumescent local anesthe-
sia is not to provide large nerve blocks. It takes a very long
time for local anesthesia to be effective in large nerves: up
to 100 minutes for the median nerve at the wrist.47 The goal
of tumescence is to bathe all tissue, including all the little
nerve branches, affected by surgery. The smaller the nerve,
the faster it is numbed. (See Video 3 [online], which dis-
plays injection of a nasal cancer reconstruction forehead
ap with up to 100 ml of 0.5% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epi-
nephrine. The injections demonstrate starting in an open
wound with a 3-ml syringe and a 30-gauge needle, alternat-
ing sites to prevent reinsertion pain, saving the columella
and alar rims for last so that they do not hurt, and injecting
proximal to distal in the forehead.)
10. Use Blunt-tipped Cannulas When Tumescing Large Areas
A sharp needle makes a skin hole entry site through
which you pass a blunt-tipped cannula, which painlessly
glides between nerves and blood vessels through subcu-
taneous fat to anesthetizing large areas more rapidly in
procedures such as forearm tendon transfers, skin graft
harvest from the thigh, and rhytidectomy.48–51 (Figs.11, 12).
When injecting 200 ml for a forearm tendon transfer or a
rhytidectomy, inject the solution from an IV bag with tub-
ing hooked up to a three-way stopcock and a 10-ml syringe.
(See Video 4 [online], which displays cannula injection
showing some of the tumescent injection of 200 ml of
1/4% lidocaine with 1/400,000 epinephrine for rhytid-
ectomy with a 10-ml syringe connected to an IV bag and
tubing with a three-way stopcock. Blunt-tipped cannulas
permit more rapid painless injection of large volume cases
such as these to provide an even better patient experi-
ence. Always reinsert the cannula inside a 1–2 cm border
of clearly tumesced numb skin to avoid cannula reinser-
tion pain.)
Fig. 9. Do not advance sharp needle tip into areas that are not num-
bered by local anesthesia.
Fig. 10. Do always see and palpate 1–2 cm of visible palpable local
anesthesia ahead of your sharp needle tip so that you never advance
the needle anywhere that is not numb. Blow slow before you go
Blow slow before you go…
Fig. 11. Sharp needle tips can traumatize nerves through puncture
or transection.
Fig. 12. Blunt tip cannulas slide in the fat with a much lower chance
of piercing nerves and blood vessels.
PRS Global Open 2021
6
11. When Tumescing Large Areas, Only Reinsert Needles
into Skin that is Already Numb and Alternate Injections
from One Side to Another
You need to reinsert the needle when anesthetizing a large
area such as a cleft lip reconstruction.52 (See Video 5 [online],
which displays injection for simultaneous cubital tunnel
and lacertus releases. The injections demonstrate very lit-
tle movement of the needle as a total of 120 ml is injected
into the anterior and medial elbow for proximal median
and ulnar nerve decompressions. Always alternate sites of
local anesthesia injection with each change of syringe so as
to give time for the local to work at the last area injected.
Always reinsert needles into clearly tumesced skin so
that needle reinsertion does not hurt. Always inject from
proximal to distal.) Always reinsert the needle at least
1 cm inside the safe border of clearly blanched, swollen,
tumesced skin so that you never insert a needle in skin
that is not numb. Patients should never feel pain with the
needle reinsertion. Alternate injecting from one side to
the other of the surgical eld so that needle reinsertion is
less likely to hurt because the last side has had more time
to get numb. (See Video 5 [online], which displays injec-
tion for simultaneous cubital tunnel and lacertus releases.
The injections demonstrate very little movement of the
needle as a total of 120 ml are injected into the anterior
and medial elbow for proximal median and ulnar nerve
decompressions. Always alternate sites of local anesthesia
injection with each change of syringe so as to give time for
the local to work at the last area injected. Always reinsert
needles into clearly tumesced skin so that needle reinser-
tion does not hurt. Always inject from proximal to distal.)
12. Always Ask Patients to Tell You Every Time They Feel
Pain during the Whole Injection Process so That You Can
Score Yourself and Improve Your Technique with Each
Injection
Every injection is a learning opportunity. (See Video 6
[online], which displays how to explain to patients about
telling the surgeon each time it hurts during the injection
process, so that we can get better and better with pain-
less injections. The video also shows stabilizing the syringe
with two hands, pinching the skin into the 27-gauge nee-
dle, and sensory noise with pinching the skin into the
needle and deep inspiration at needle insertion time.)
In our practice, if a patient feels pain only once in the
whole injection process, the medical student scores a hole
in one. If the patient feels pain twice, the resident scores
an eagle. If the patient feels pain three times, the lead
author scores a birdie. If we all score ourselves every time
we inject every patient, our inherent desire to improve our
score will drive us to get better and better injectors. (See
Video 6 [online].)
13. Always Inject Too Much Volume Instead of Not
Enough Volume to Eliminate Surgery Pain and the Need
for “Top Ups”
A very common mistake is to not inject enough vol-
ume. The goal is to tumesce all tissues with visible and
palpable local anesthesia at least 2 cm beyond wherever
you will insert sharp objects or manipulate fractures. You
never want to have to add local anesthesia during surgery
because a patient feels pain, any more than you want
patients to wake up during general anesthesia. We use the
extremely safe maximal dosage of 7 mg/kg of lidocaine
with epinephrine. We add up to 150 ml of saline to 50 ml
of 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine when we need
up to 200 ml of volume. We do not need higher concen-
trations than 0.25% lidocaine with 1:400,000 epinephrine,
which provides effective anesthesia for procedures lasting
less than 3 hours.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients will truly think you are magical if you take
the time to learn these simple techniques that we easily
teach all our medical students and residents. They will
enable you to almost painlessly tumesce large areas of the
body with local anesthesia for safer surgery without the
sedation.
Donald Lalonde, MD, MSc, FRCSC
Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Dalhousie University
Suite C204, 600 Main Street
Saint John, New Brunswick
Canada E2K 1J5
E-mail: dlalonde@drlalonde.ca
REFERENCES
1. Strazar AR, Leynes PG, Lalonde DH. Minimizing the pain
of local anesthesia injection. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;132:
675–684.
2. Farhangkhoee H, Lalonde J, Lalonde DH. Teaching medical stu-
dents and residents how to inject local anesthesia almost pain-
lessly. Can J Plast Surg. 2012;20:169–172.
3. Lalonde DH. “Hole-in-one” local anesthesia for wide-awake car-
pal tunnel surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126:1642–1644.
4. MacNeill AL, Wright J, Mayich DJ. Qualitative aspects of patient
pain during surgery with wide-awake local anesthesia. J Orthop.
2019;16:105–108.
5. Lalonde DH, Tang JB. How the wide awake tourniquet-free
approach is changing hand surgery in most countries of the
world. Hand Clin. 2019;35:xiii–xxiv.
6. Lalonde D. Minimally invasive anesthesia in wide awake hand
surgery. Hand Clin. 2014;30:1–6.
7. Yu J, Ji TA, Craig M, et al. Evidence-based sterility: the evolv-
ing role of eld sterility in skin and minor hand surgery. Plast
Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019;7:e2481.
8. Behar BJ, Danso OO, Farhat B, et al. Collaboration in outreach:
the Kumasi, Ghana, model. Hand Clin. 2019;35:429–434.
9. Grandizio LC, Graham J, Klena JC. Current trends in WALANT
Surgery: a survey of American Society for Surgery of the Hand
Members. J Hand Surg Glob Online. 2020;2:186–190.
10. Kang S-W, Park H-M, Park J-K, et al. Open cubital and carpal tun-
nel release using wide-awake technique: reduction of postopera-
tive pain. J Pain Res. 2019;12:2725–2731.
11. Hagert E. Clinical diagnosis and wide-awake surgical treatment
of proximal median nerve entrapment at the elbow: a prospec-
tive study. Hand (N Y). 2013;8:41–46.
12. Abdullah S, Ahmad AA, Lalonde D. Wide awake local anesthe-
sia no tourniquet forearm triple tendon transfer in radial nerve
palsy. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2020;8:e3023.
13. Higgins A, Lalonde DH, Bell M, et al. Avoiding exor tendon
repair rupture with intraoperative total active movement exami-
nation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126:941–945.
Joukhadar and Lalonde Minimizing Local Anesthetic Injection Pain
7
14. Lalonde D, Higgins A. Wide awake exor tendon repair in the
nger. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2016;4:e797.
15. Zukawa M, Osada R, Makino H, et al. Wide-awake exor pollicis
longus tendon reconstruction with evaluation of the active vol-
untary contraction of the ruptured muscle-tendon. Plast Reconstr
Surg. 2019;143:176–180.
16. Tang JB. Wide-awake primary exor tendon repair, tenolysis, and
tendon transfer. Clin Orthop Surg. 2015;7:275–281.
17. Mckee D, Lalonde D. Minimal pain local anesthetic injection
with blunt tipped cannula for wide awake upper blepharoplasty.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017;5:e1310.
18. Lalonde DH. Conceptual origins, current practice, and views of
wide awake hand surgery. J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2017;42:886–895.
19. Feldman G, Orbach H, Rinat B, et al. Internal xation of meta-
carpal fractures using wide awake local anesthesia and no tourni-
quet. Hand Surg Rehabil. 2020;39:214–217.
20. Tahir M, Chaudhry EA, Zaffar Z, et al. Fixation of distal radius
fractures using wide-awake local anaesthesia with no tourni-
quet (WALANT) technique: A randomized control trial of a
cost-effective and resource-friendly procedure. Bone Joint Res.
2020;9:429–439.
21. Orbach H, Rozen N, Rubin G, et al. Open reduction and
internal xation of intra-articular distal radius fractures under
wide-awake local anesthesia with no tourniquet. J Int Med Res.
2018;46:4269–4276.
22. Ahmad AA, Sabari SS, Ruslan SR, et al. Wide-awake anesthesia
for olecranon fracture xation. Hand (N Y). 2021;16:402–406.
23. Ahmad AA, Ubaidah Mustapa Kamal MA, Ruslan SR, et al.
Plating of clavicle fracture using the wide-awake technique. J
Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2020;29:2319–2325.
24. Frank SG, Lalonde DH. How acidic is the lidocaine we are inject-
ing, and how much bicarbonate should we add? Can J Plast Surg.
2012;20:71–73.
25. McKay W, Morris R, Mushlin P. Sodium bicarbonate attenuates
pain on skin inltration with lidocaine, with or without epineph-
rine. Anesth Analg. 1987;66:572–574.
26. Kattan S, Lee SM, Hersh EV, et al. Do buffered local anesthet-
ics provide more successful anesthesia than nonbuffered
solutions in patients with pulpally involved teeth requir-
ing dental therapy?: A systematic review. J Am Dent Assoc.
2019;150:165–177.
27. Cepeda MS, Tzortzopoulou A, Thackrey M, et al. Adjusting the
pH of lidocaine for reducing pain on injection. Cochrane Database
Syst Rev. 2010:CD006581.
28. Hogan ME, vanderVaart S, Perampaladas K, et al. Systematic
review and meta-analysis of the effect of warming local anesthet-
ics on injection pain. Ann Emerg Med. 2011;58:86–98.e1.
29. Arendt-Nielsen L, Egekvist H, Bjerring P. Pain following con-
trolled cutaneous insertion of needles with different diameters.
Somatosens Mot Res. 2006;23:37–43.
30. Zilinsky I, Bar-Meir E, Zaslansky R, et al. Ten commandments for
minimal pain during administration of local anesthetics. J Drugs
Dermatol. 2005;4:212–216.
31. Apseloff G, Onel E, Patou G. Time to onset of analgesia follow-
ing local inltration of liposome bupivacaine in healthy volun-
teers: a randomized, single-blind, sequential cohort, crossover
study. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2013;51:367–373.
32. Oni G, Rasko Y, Kenkel J. Topical lidocaine enhanced by laser
pretreatment: a safe and effective method of analgesia for facial
rejuvenation. Aesthet Surg J. 2013;33:854–861.
33. Strommen JA, Daube JR. Determinants of pain in needle electro-
myography. Clin Neurophysiol. 2001;112:1414–1418.
34. Nanitsos E, Vartuli R, Forte A, et al. The effect of vibra-
tion on pain during local anaesthesia injections. Aust Dent J.
2009;54:94–100.
35. Rasooli F, Sotoodehnia M, Nejati A, et al. The assessment of ice
pack effect in pain reduction during digital nerve block: a ran-
domized clinical study. Turk J Emerg Med. 2020;20:81–85.
36. Aminabadi NA, Farahani RM. The effect of pre-cooling the injec-
tion site on pediatric pain perception during the administration
of local anesthesia. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2009;10:43–50.
37. Hoxhallari E, Behr IJ, Bradshaw JS, et al. Virtual reality improves
the patient experience during wide-awake local anesthesia no
tourniquet hand surgery: a single-blind, randomized, prospec-
tive study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019;144:408–414.
38. Lambert V, Boylan P, Boran L, et al. Virtual reality distrac-
tion for acute pain in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.
2020;10:CD010686.
39. Höe M, Hauck M, Engel AK, et al. Viewing a needle pricking
a hand that you perceive as yours enhances unpleasantness of
pain. Pain. 2012;153:1074–1081.
40. Maxwell D, O’Brien J, Sparkes G, et al. Topical 2% lidocaine
gel versus placebo in burn debridement pain. Can J Plast Surg.
1996;6:109.
41. Kamrul-Hasan A, Paul AK, Amin MN, et al. Insulin injec-
tion practice and injection complications - results from the
Bangladesh Insulin Injection Technique Survey. Eur Endocrinol.
2020;16:41–48.
42. Martires KJ, Malbasa CL, Bordeaux JS. A randomized controlled
crossover trial: lidocaine injected at a 90-degree angle causes
less pain than lidocaine injected at a 45-degree angle. J Am Acad
Dermatol. 2011;65:1231–1233.
43. Morris R, McKay W, Mushlin P. Comparison of pain associated
with intradermal and subcutaneous inltration with various local
anesthetic solutions. Anesth Analg. 1987;66:1180–1182.
44. Barreveld A, Witte J, Chahal H, et al. Preventive analgesia
by local anesthetics: the reduction of postoperative pain by
peripheral nerve blocks and intravenous drugs. Anesth Analg.
2013;116:1141–1161.
45. Rosen SG, Linares OA, Saneld JA, et al. Epinephrine kinetics
in humans: radiotracer methodology. J Clin Endocrinol Metab.
1989;69:753–761.
46. Shokrzadeh A, Seddighi A, Seddighi AS. Comparison of proxi-
mal injections of local anesthetics with distal injections in intra-
venous block. Glob J Health Sci. 2010;2:215-217.
47. Lovely LM, Chishti YZ, Woodland JL, et al. How much volume
of local anesthesia and how long should you wait after injec-
tion for an effective wrist median nerve block? Hand (N Y).
2018;13:281–284.
48. Lalonde D, Wong A. Local anesthetics: what’s new in minimal
pain injection and best evidence in pain control. Plast Reconstr
Surg. 2014;134(4 suppl 2):40S–49S.
49. Garcia CP, Avila D, Ferreira V, et al. Anesthesia using microcan-
nula and sharp needle in upper blepharoplasty: a randomized,
double-blind clinical trial evaluating pain, bruising, and ecchy-
moses. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2021;74:364–369.
50. DeJoseph LM. Cannulas for facial ller placement. Facial Plast
Surg Clin North Am. 2012;20:215–220, vi.
51. Mckee D, Lalonde D. Minimal pain local anesthetic injection
with blunt tipped cannula for wide awake upper blepharoplasty.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017;5:e1310.
52. Lalonde DH, Price C, Wong AL, et al. Minimally painful local
anesthetic injection for cleft lip/nasal repair in grown patients.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2014;2:e171.
... [11] As a limitation of our study, the various tangential techniques employed by some providers to reduce pain, which could have a significant impact and contribute to important variability, have not been examined. These include buffering the solution with sodium bicarbonate, smaller needle gauges, solutions at room temperature, pinching loose skin or creating "sensory noise" near the injection site, and injecting at 90°. [19][20][21][22][23][24] In addition, the study did not investigate patient and provider preference, a potential underlying element of which is the number of injections. However, confidence in our comparisons is achieved by the reasonably sized sample which removed sources of confounding by excluding complex presentations and including a single injury type. ...
Article
Full-text available
Objectives: Digital injuries are among the most common presentations to the emergency department. In order to sufficiently examine and manage these injuries, adequate, prompt, and predictable anesthesia is essential. In this trial, we aim to primarily compare the degree of pain and anesthesia onset time between the two-injection dorsal block technique (TD) and the single-injection volar subcutaneous block (SV) technique. Further, we describe the temporal and anatomical effects of both techniques for an accurate delineation of the anesthetized regions. Methods: This is a single-center prospective randomized controlled trial involving patients presenting with isolated wounds to the fingers requiring primary repair under local anesthesia. Patients were randomized to either the SV or TD blocks. The primary outcome was procedure-related pain (Numerical Rating Scale). Further, we assessed the extent of anesthesia along with the anesthesia onset time. Results: A total of 100 patients were included in the final analysis, 50 on each arm of the study. The median pain score during injection was significantly higher in patients who received TD block than patients who received SV block (median [interquartile range] = 4 [2.25, 5.00] vs. 3.00 [2.00, 4.00], respectively, P = 0.006). However, anesthesia onset time was not statistically different among the groups (P = 0.39). The extent of anesthesia was more predictable in the dorsal block compared to the volar block. Conclusion: The single-injection volar subcutaneous blocks are less painful with a similar anesthesia onset time. Injuries presenting in the proximal dorsal region may benefit from the two-injection dorsal blocks, given the anatomical differences and timely anesthesia of the region.
Article
Waste in medicine can be defined narrowly by including only physical waste. It can be defined widely by including the concept of wasting time, energy, money and waste of materials. We will provide an overview of waste mitigation and how it can be a union between saving money and protecting the environment.
Article
The advent of minimal pain tumescent local anesthesia injection has improved patient safety by eliminating the need for sedation for many wide awake operations, especially in patients with significant medical comorbidities. Modified radical mastectomy (MRM) for breast cancer is commonly performed under general anesthesia as it requires the dissection of the entire breast and an ipsilateral axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). General anesthesia has been shown to have a high risk in patients with severe medical comorbidities. We present a case of a 78-year-old male patient who was diagnosed with invasive ductal breast carcinoma, cardiac failure, and other metabolic abnormalities. Taking his comorbidities into account, we performed a wide awake MRM and ALND after tumescent minimal pain local anesthesia injection. The patient experienced the successful procedure safely with minimal discomfort.
Article
The aim of this review article is to provide many important tips and tricks for surgeons to start Wide Awake Local Anaesthesia No Tourniquet (WALANT) hand surgery in their practice. The massive cost reduction of this disruptive new approach will enable them to increase access to hand surgery for their patients who cannot afford unnecessary sedation or unnecessary sterility of the expensive main operating room environment. Evidence-based sterility will permit surgeons to move a lot of their surgery out of the main operating room to minor procedure rooms without a significant increase in infection rates. Important pointers on how to inject minimally painful local anaesthesia will have patients thinking the surgeon injector is a bit of a magician. WALANT enables surgeons to improve the outcomes of many hand surgery procedures. Level of Evidence: Level V (Therapeutic)
Article
Full-text available
Tendon transfer for radial nerve palsy is a common procedure done under general anesthesia. We describe a surgical technique of triple tendon transfer with wide awake local anesthesia no tourniquet (WALANT). We transfer flexor carpi radialis to extensor digitorum communis, palmaris longus to extensor pollicis longus, and pronator teres to extensor carpi radialis brevis. This is commonly known as the Brand transfer. Our anesthetic or WALANT solution consists of up to 200 mL of 1:400,000 epinephrine, 0.25% lidocaine buffered with sodium bicarbonate. This technique overcomes the problem of judging the appropriate amount of transfer tension by observing awake patients actively extend their fingers, thumb, and wrist during the surgery and making adjustments before we close the wound. In our experience, there is no need of brain retraining because a patient is able to immediately use the flexor muscles to perform extension movements. WALANT is a safe and viable option for radial nerve tendon transfers.
Article
Full-text available
INTRODUCTION With the emergence of blunt-tipped microcannulas, there is an hypothesis that these could cause less damage and reduce pain compare to conventional sharp needles in eyelid surgery .The purpose is to determine whether a 18G blunt-tipped cannula can be better than a 26G needle. METHODS Prospective, observer-blinded, randomized clinical trial. Conducted from June 2017 to December 2018. 68 patients were randomized to receive local anesthesia injections for upper blepharoplasty. Infiltration via a 26-gauge sharp needle was performed in one side, and, in the other side, infiltration via an 18-gauge stainless-steel blunt-tipped microcannula was used. Numeric rating scale (NRS) of 0 to 10 was used to blindly assess pain in patients receiving anesthesia injections with both needle types. Photographs of the eyelids of each patient were taken in five different periods and used by 3 blinded observers to identify bruise or ecchymoses. RESULTS 136 eyelid operations. There was no statistically significant difference when both groups were compared, however, the average score of pain was higher in patients taking the infiltration via needle (2.85 versus 2.50). Regarding the evaluation on bruising and ecchymoses, the results showed that, in the five periods evaluated, there was no statistical difference in bruising and ecchymosis in the eyelids when taking the infiltration via sharp needle compared with eyelids taking infiltration via (blunt-tipped) microcannula. CONCLUSION The evaluation on the blunt-tipped microcannula showed a lower pain score mean than the sharp needle (2.5 versus 2.85) (p>0.05). There was no statistically difference in the bruising and ecchymosis courses.
Article
Full-text available
Aims We hypothesized that the wide-awake local anaesthesia with no tourniquet (WALANT) technique is cost-effective, easy to use, safe, and reproducible, with a low learning curve towards mastery, having a high patient satisfaction rate. Furthermore, WALANT would be a suitable alternative for the austere and developing nation environments where lack of funds and resources are a common issue. Methods This was a randomized control trial of 169 patients who required surgery for closed isolated distal radius fractures. The study was performed between March 2016 and April 2019 at a public sector level 1 trauma centre. General anaesthesia was used in 56 patients, Bier’s block in 58 patients, and WALANT in 55 patients. Data were collected on pre-, peri-, and postoperative parameters, clinical outcome, hospital costs, and patient satisfaction. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used with a p-value of 0.05 being significant. Results Operations with WALANT proceeded sooner, and patients recovered faster, resulting in mean fewer missed working days (7.8 (SD 1.67)) compared with general anaesthesia (20.1 (SD 7.37)) or Bier’s block (14.1 (SD 7.65)) (p < 0.001). The WALANT patients did not develop complications, while the other patients did (p < 0.04). Clinical outcomes did not differ, nor did surgeon qualification affect clinical outcomes. Mean hospital costs were lower for WALANT ($428.50 (SD 77.71)) than for general anaesthesia ($630.63 (SD 114.77)) or Bier’s block ($734.00 (SD 37.54)) (p < 0.001). Patient satisfaction was also higher (p < 0.001). Conclusion WALANT for distal radius fractures results in a faster recovery, is more cost-effective, has similar clinical outcomes, and has fewer complications than general anaesthesia or Bier's block. This makes WALANT an attractive technique in any setting, but especially in middle- and low-income countries. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(7):429–439.
Article
Full-text available
Purpose To define self-reported WALANT use among American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH) members. We aimed to define surgeon and practice demographics relative to WALANT use and identify potential barriers for WALANT implementation. Methods An anonymous multiple-choice survey was electronically distributed to all active ASSH members. Incomplete surveys were included in the final analysis. Surgeons were asked to provide reasons for not performing WALANT, which were categorized based on general themes. We compared practice and surgeon demographic information relative to WALANT use. Results Of 3,826 ASSH members, 869 responded (23%). A total of 79% of respondents had performed at least one WALANT procedure; 62% currently incorporated WALANT into their practice. Hospital-owned outpatient surgery centers were the most common location for WALANT procedures (31%). Canadian surgeons were more likely to use WALANT, compared with US and international surgeons. Surgeons with fewer years in practice and higher-volume surgeons were more likely to use WALANT. There was no statistically significant association between either practice or income structure and WALANT use. For carpal tunnel release (CTR), 13% did not offer patients WALANT, whereas 43% offered WALANT to all patients. Moreover, 51% of surgeons reported that anesthesia staff was required to be present for WALANT cases at their institution. In determining reasons for not using WALANT, 16% reported that they preferred a tourniquet for visualization. Only 2% had concerns regarding epinephrine use in the hand. Conclusions The results of this survey illustrate current WALANT use among ASSH members and defines the demographics of those employing WALANT. Lack of familiarity with WALANT and an acceptance of the use of epinephrine in the hand has increased from prior ASSH surveys. Lack of familiarity with the technique, concerns regarding operating room efficiency, and patient preferences remain considerable barriers to more widespread adoption of WALANT procedures. Type of study/level of evidence Economic and Decision Analysis V.
Article
Full-text available
Introduction: Diabetes mellitus is highly prevalent in Bangladesh and insulin is often needed for diabetes control. We lack sufficient data on the insulin injection technique and injection-related complications. Methods: The Bangladesh Insulin Injection Technique Survey (BIITS) was conducted in 2018 in 18 centres throughout Bangladesh, involving 847 patients taking insulin for at least 6 months. All of the study subjects were interviewed using a structured questionnaire focusing on key insulin injection parameters. Results: The mean duration of insulin use by the study subjects was 3.84 (± 4.05) years and the mean daily dose of insulin was 41 (± 25) units. A total of 71.6% participants performed ≤2 injections/day and premixed insulins were the most commonly used insulins. Mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) was 9.5% (± 2%). The proportion of syringe users and pen-device users was 68.1% and 31.9%, respectively. Most of the participants injected in the abdomen and rotated the injection site(s). The majority lifted the skinfold correctly and inserted the needle at a 90-degree angle, but their dwell times after injections were not adequate. A total of 9.2% of the subjects had injection-site lipohypertrophy (LH) and among them, 38.5% injected into the lesion. Patients with LH had higher HbA1c. Higher duration of insulin use (≥5 years), reusing needles more often (>10 times), and injecting at angles other than 90 degrees were independent predictors of LH. The incidences of hypoglycaemia (36.7%) and hyperglycaemia (67.4%) were very high, and subjects with LH had higher chances of both hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia. Though most (92.1%) of the patients received education about insulin injection initially, it was not repeated in the recent follow-up and was found to be ineffective. Conclusion: A huge gap between the insulin administration guidelines and current practice was observed in this study. Complications of insulin injections were also common. Healthcare providers should pay more attention to insulin education and re-evaluate injection practices from time to time.
Article
Full-text available
Field sterility is commonly used for skin and minor hand surgery performed in the ambulatory setting. Surgical site infection (SSI) rates are similar for these same procedures when performed in the main operating room (OR). In this paper, we aim to look at both current evidence and common sense logic supporting the use of some of the techniques and apparel designed to prevent SSI. This is a literature review of the evidence behind the ability of gloves, masks, gowns, drapes, head covers, footwear, and ventilation systems to prevent SSIs. We used MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed and included literature from the inception of each database up to March 2019. We could not find substantial evidence to support the use of main OR sterility practices such as head covers, gowns, full patient draping, laminar airflow, and footwear to reduce SSIs in skin and minor hand surgery. Field sterility in ambulatory minor procedure rooms outside the main OR is appropriate for most skin and minor hand surgery procedures. SSIs in these procedures are easily treatable with minimal patient morbidity and do not justify the cost and waste associated with the use of main OR sterility.
Article
Background: Virtual reality (VR) computer technology creates a simulated environment, perceived as comparable to the real world, with which users can actively interact. The effectiveness of VR distraction on acute pain intensity in children is uncertain. Objectives: To assess the effectiveness and adverse effects of virtual reality (VR) distraction interventions for children (0 to 18 years) with acute pain in any healthcare setting. Search methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and four trial registries to October 2019. We also searched reference lists of eligible studies, handsearched relevant journals and contacted study authors. Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cross-over and cluster-RCTs, comparing VR distraction to no distraction, non-VR distraction or other VR distraction. Data collection and analysis: We used standard Cochrane methodological processes. Two reviewers assessed risk of bias and extracted data independently. The primary outcome was acute pain intensity (during procedure, and up to one hour post-procedure). Secondary outcomes were adverse effects, child satisfaction with VR, pain-related distress, parent anxiety, rescue analgesia and cost. We used GRADE and created 'Summary of findings' tables. Main results: We included 17 RCTs (1008 participants aged four to 18 years) undergoing various procedures in healthcare settings. We did not pool data because the heterogeneity in population (i.e. diverse ages and developmental stages of children and their different perceptions and reactions to pain) and variations in procedural conditions (e.g. phlebotomy, burn wound dressings, physical therapy sessions), and consequent level of pain experienced, made statistical pooling of data impossible. We narratively describe results. We judged most studies to be at unclear risk of selection bias, high risk of performance and detection bias, and high risk of bias for small sample sizes. Across all comparisons and outcomes, we downgraded the certainty of evidence to low or very low due to serious study limitations and serious or very serious indirectness. We also downgraded some of the evidence for very serious imprecision. 1: VR distraction versus no distraction Acute pain intensity: during procedure Self-report: one study (42 participants) found no beneficial effect of non-immersive VR (very low-certainty evidence). Observer-report: no data. Behavioural measurements (observer-report): two studies, 62 participants; low-certainty evidence. One study (n = 42) found no beneficial effect of non-immersive VR. One study (n = 20) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR. Acute pain intensity: post-procedure Self-report: 10 studies, 461 participants; very low-certainty evidence. Four studies (n = 95) found no beneficial effect of immersive and semi-immersive or non-immersive VR. Five studies (n = 357) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR. Another study (n = 9) reported less pain in the VR group. Observer-report: two studies (216 participants; low-certainty evidence) found a beneficial effect of immersive VR, as reported by primary caregiver/parents or nurses. One study (n = 80) found a beneficial effect of immersive VR, as reported by researchers. Behavioural measurements (observer-report): one study (42 participants) found no beneficial effect of non-immersive VR (very low-certainty evidence). Adverse effects: five studies, 154 participants; very low-certainty evidence. Three studies (n = 53) reported no adverse effects. Two studies (n = 101) reported mild adverse effects (e.g. nausea) in the VR group. 2: VR distraction versus other non-VR distraction Acute pain intensity: during procedure Self-report, observer-report and behavioural measurements (observer-report): two studies, 106 participants: Self-report: one study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR and one (n = 41) found no evidence of a difference in mean pain change scores (very low-certainty evidence). Observer-report: one study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR and one (n = 41) found no evidence of a difference in mean pain change scores (low-certainty evidence). Behavioural measurements (observer-report): one study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR and one (n = 41) reported a difference in mean pain change scores with fewer pain behaviours in VR group (low-certainty evidence). Acute pain intensity: post-procedure Self-report: eight studies, 575 participants; very low-certainty evidence. Two studies (n = 146) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR. Two studies (n = 252) reported a between-group difference favouring immersive VR. One study (n = 59) found no beneficial effect of immersive VR versus television and Child Life non-VR distraction. One study (n = 18) found no beneficial effect of semi-immersive VR. Two studies (n = 100) reported no between-group difference. Observer-report: three studies, 187 participants; low-certainty evidence. One study (n = 81) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR for parent, nurse and researcher reports. One study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR for caregiver reports. Another study (n = 41) reported no evidence of a difference in mean pain change scores. Behavioural measurements (observer-report): two studies, 106 participants; low-certainty evidence. One study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR. Another study (n = 41) reported no evidence of a difference in mean pain change scores. Adverse effects: six studies, 429 participants; very low-certainty evidence. Three studies (n = 229) found no evidence of a difference between groups. Two studies (n = 141) reported no adverse effects in VR group. One study (n = 59) reported no beneficial effect in reducing estimated cyber-sickness before and after VR immersion. 3: VR distraction versus other VR distraction We did not identify any studies for this comparison. Authors' conclusions: We found low-certainty and very low-certainty evidence of the effectiveness of VR distraction compared to no distraction or other non-VR distraction in reducing acute pain intensity in children in any healthcare setting. This level of uncertainty makes it difficult to interpret the benefits or lack of benefits of VR distraction for acute pain in children. Most of the review primary outcomes were assessed by only two or three small studies. We found limited data for adverse effects and other secondary outcomes. Future well-designed, large, high-quality trials may have an important impact on our confidence in the results.
Article
Background Fixation of clavicle fractures has now become a more popular option as it provides better outcome compared with conservative management. Wide-awake local anesthesia no tourniquet (WALANT) has been effectively used in plating of distal radius and olecranon fractures. This paper expands the usage of WALANT into the shoulder girdle, namely plating of the clavicle that has not been described. The operation is typically performed under general anesthesia. Methods We report a case series of 16 patients who successfully underwent fixation of the clavicle under the wide-awake technique. The clavicle fractures were grouped under the AO Fracture Classification. The WALANT solution comprised 1% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine, and 10:1 sodium bicarbonate. A total of 40 mL was injected in each patient with 10 mL subcutaneously along the clavicle followed by 30 mL subperiosteally at multiple intervals and directions. Results The Numerical Pain Rating Score was 0 during WALANT injection and during surgery except for 2 patients with Numerical Pain Rating Scores of 1 and 2, respectively, during reduction. Conclusion We conclude that clavicle plating under WALANT is a good alternative option of anesthesia.
Article
Objectives: Digital nerve block is a painful procedure. Several methods have been proposed to decrease the injection pain. Applying an ice pack is a pertinent choice due to its effectiveness on pain reduction, convenience, and low costs. In this study, the degree of injection pain reduction was assessed after applying an ice pack to the site of anesthetic injection. Methods: One hundred participants with traumatic finger injury were assessed. Digital nerve block was performed in fifty patients in the intervention group after 6 min of ice application. In the control group, this procedure was done without ice. The primary outcome was the difference between the needle stick and infiltration pain scores with and without ice pack. The secondary outcome the patient satisfaction score. The protocol of this study was approved by the Institutional Review Board, and it is registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials. Results: The pain score was assessed using a Numeric Rating Scale. Both the needle skin and infiltration pain scores were statistically significantly lower in the intervention group (P < 0.001). The mean and median needle stick pain scores were 1.5 and 1.0 in the intervention group and 6.8 and 7.0 in the control group, respectively. Moreover, the mean and median infiltration pain scores were 2.7 and 2.0 in the intervention group and 8.5 and 9.0 in the control group, respectively. Patient satisfaction score was significantly higher in the intervention group. Conclusions: Ice pack is inexpensive, readily available, and is easy to apply. We recommend this method to reduce the injection pain before digital nerve block in the emergency department.
Article
We sought to report on the use of wide-awake local anesthesia and no tourniquet (WALANT) for internal fixation of metacarpal fractures. We retrospectively examined 10 patients with metacarpal fractures that required either closed reduction and internal fixation (CRIF) or open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). WALANT was administered 20 minutes before the surgery outside the operating room. Once the area was numb, an open or closed reduction was made followed by internal fixation of the fracture using plating, intramedullary screws or Kirshner wires (K-wires). We used intraoperative X-ray to confirm anatomic reduction and correct internal fixation. After proper reduction and fixation, the active range of motion (AROM) was assessed while the patient was awake. Patients were discharged the next day after evaluating their neurovascular status and establishing pain control. Follow-up evaluations were carried out at 2, 6 and 12 weeks postoperatively. All individuals underwent uneventful operations. No significant pain or bleeding was recorded during the operation. Nine out of ten patients regained full AROM at the 12-week follow-up visit in the outpatient clinic. One patient still had slight reduction of range of motion (ROM) of the 5th metacarpophalangeal joint. No neurovascular damage or surgical site morbidity was recorded. CRIF and ORIF of simple metacarpal fractures can be executed successfully using WALANT with good functional results without increased morbidity compared to monitored anesthesia care.