Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36882711›Full record

Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2023

Cooling spray or lidocaine spray and needle insertion pain in hemodialysis patients: an open-label cross-over randomized clinical trial.

Armin Khosravi Pour, Sima Hejazi, Ahmad Kameli, Tooba Hoseini Azizi, Mohammad Reza Armat, Maesoomeh Eshghi

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Armin Khosravi PourStudent Research Committee, Bojnurd Faculty of Nursing, North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences, Bojnurd, Iran.
Sima HejaziDepartment of Nursing, Bojnurd Faculty of Nursing, North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences, Shahriar Street, Bojnurd, Iran. s.hejazi@nkums.ac.ir.
Ahmad KameliDepartment of Disaster Public Health, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Tooba Hoseini AziziDepartment of Nursing, Bojnurd Faculty of Nursing, North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences, Shahriar Street, Bojnurd, Iran.
Mohammad Reza ArmatDepartment of Nursing, Bojnurd Faculty of Nursing, North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences, Shahriar Street, Bojnurd, Iran.
Maesoomeh EshghiStudent Research Committee, Bojnurd Faculty of Nursing, North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences, Bojnurd, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe needle insertion pain to perform hemodialysis is the main challenge and a common problem that requires pain management techniques for patients' comfort.

aimThis study aimed to compare the effects of cooling and lidocaine sprays on needle insertion pain in hemodialysis patients.

methodsIn this randomized cross-over clinical trial study, the hemodialysis patients were selected through convenience sampling according to inclusion criteria and randomly assigned to three intervention groups using the block randomization method. Each patient received three interventions in a cross-over design: Cooling spray or 10% lidocaine spray or placebo spray. There was a 2-week wash-out time between each intervention. The pain score was measured four times for each patient by the Numerical Rating Scale.

resultsForty-one hemodialysis patients were included. The results showed a significant interaction between time and group (p < 0.05), so only observations of time 1 with adjustment for baseline values were used to evaluate the effect of the intervention. Patients receiving cooling spray reported 2.29 less pain score on average compared to placebo (B=-2.29, 95% CI: -4.17 to -0.43; p < 0.05); Also, patients receiving cooling spray reported a 1.61 lower pain score than those receiving lidocaine spray, but this difference was not statistically significant (95% CI: -0.26 to 3.48; p > 0.05).

conclusionThe cooling spray was effective in reducing the needle insertion pain. Although it was impossible to compare the pain scores at different times and following different interventions, the present study results can help supplement the existing knowledge regarding cooling and lidocaine sprays.

Indexed as

LidocainePainCross-Over StudiesDietary SupplementsHumansRenal DialysisLidocaineCross over DesignHemodialysisLidocainePainVapocoolant Spray

Identifiers

PMID36882711
PMCPMC9990356

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.