ArticleCureus2022
Comparison of Supraclavicular Regional Nerve Block Versus Infraclavicular Regional Nerve Block in Distal Radial Open Reduction and Internal Fixation: A Retrospective Case Series.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06588907 (Evaluation of the Efficacy of Procedural Sedoanalgesia and Infraclavicular Nerve Blockade on Analgesia in Forearm Fractures in the Emergency Department), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Evaluation of the Efficacy of Procedural Sedoanalgesia and Infraclavicular Nerve Blockade on Analgesia in Forearm Fractures in the Emergency Department
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Hematoma Block as an Alternate Mode of Anesthesia for Management of Extra-Articular Distal End Radius Fracture with Percutaneous K-Wire Fixation in Emergency Department.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2024Article
- Efficacy of intertruncal and corner-pocket approaches of ultrasound-guided supraclavicular block in terms of ulnar nerve blockade: A randomised controlled study.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The management of pain in patients undergoing open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of distal radius fractures (DRFs) remains an area of debate for anesthesiologists due to a variety of block options and no definitive superior technique among these modalities. In this retrospective case series, we compare the efficacy of supraclavicular versus infraclavicular regional nerve blocks for surgical patients undergoing distal radial ORIF operations to determine if one approach was superior. Methodology This retrospective case series included patients undergoing ORIF of a DRF at a tertiary academic medical center between April 28, 2016, and August 23, 2021. In total, 54 patients undergoing ORIF of a DRF provided written consent for the nerve block(s) on the day of surgery. Of these 54 patients, 54 (100%) underwent primary procedures. Of the 54 primary ORIF patients, 28 (52%) received the supraclavicular block, while 26 (48%) received the infraclavicular nerve block. Results The infraclavicular and supraclavicular groups did not significantly differ regarding age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists, weight, or body mass index. The primary (intraoperative opioid use) and secondary (postoperative opioid use, postoperative nausea and vomiting in the post-anesthetic care unit, highest and average pain scores, and time to discharge) outcomes data were included in the study. The infraclavicular and supraclavicular groups did not significantly differ in any of the assessed outcomes except for time to discharge. Conclusions The supraclavicular block approach for distal radius ORIF offers an effective and non-inferior alternative to the infraclavicular block approach concerning effective analgesia and safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.