Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Infus Nurs. 2012 Mar-Apr;35(2):93-9. doi: 10.1097/NAN.0b013e31824241cc.

A randomized double-blind study comparing intradermal anesthetic tolerability, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of lidocaine, buffered lidocaine, and bacteriostatic normal saline for peripheral intravenous insertion.

Author information

1
Ambulatory Care Services, University of Maryland Shore Health System, Easton, Maryland, USA. vritz@shorehealth.org

Abstract

In this double-blind study, 256 surgical patients meeting eligibility criteria were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to 1 of the 3 intradermal injection groups prior to intravenous (IV) line insertion (Group 1=1% lidocaine, Group 2=1% buffered lidocaine, and Group 3=bacteriostatic normal saline with a benzyl alcohol preservative). The most tolerable solution, as measured by the average level of pain from an intradermal insertion, was buffered lidocaine (Group 2). The most efficacious, as measured by average level of pain at IV cannulation, were Groups 1 and 2. Group 3 was the most cost-effective.

PMID:
22382793
DOI:
10.1097/NAN.0b013e31824241cc
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
    Loading ...
    Support Center