ArticleJournal of the colleges of medicine of South Africa2024
Knowledge, attitudes, and practices on the use of local anaesthesia in the Emergency Department.
Article in Journal of the colleges of medicine of South Africa, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Local Anaesthetic Dosing and Toxicity Knowledge in Australian Emergency Departments: A Multicentre Cross-Sectional Survey.Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2026Article
- Emergency Preparedness for Local Anesthetic Systemic Toxicity in Dental Practice: Dentists' Knowledge, Awareness, and Institutional Availability of Lipid Emulsion Therapy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Regional anaesthesia in the emergency centre: Knowledge, attitudes and practices of doctors in the Western Cape, South Africa.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Local anaesthesia (LA) is frequently used in the Emergency Department (ED). Local anaesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST) is a potentially fatal complication associated with its use. It is assumed that all doctors administering LA are trained in all aspects of its use including the management of LAST. Methods: A prospective, multicentre cross-sectional study was conducted at three academic EDs in Gauteng. Doctors working in the ED completed an online questionnaire designed to assess knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding the use of LA as well as the recognition and management of LAST. Results: A total of 94 completed questionnaires were analysed. Of these, 44% of participants had graduated from medical school less than 5 years ago, and 72% had less than 5 years of experience working in the ED. The overall mean knowledge score percentage for the safe use of LA was 48.2%. The overall mean knowledge score percentage for recognition and management of LAST was 56.7%. A total of 78% of participants knew that intravenous intralipid emulsion (ILE) therapy is needed in managing LAST; however, only 25% of participants knew where to access ILE and only 33% knew how to use it. Conclusion: The overall level of knowledge on LA and the management of LAST among doctors working in the ED is low. There is also an apparent lack of awareness of the potential for toxicity despite frequent use of LA. Although the occurrence of LAST is rare, our findings highlight an obligation for continuous education on local anaesthesia and the management of LAST. Contribution: The result of this research indicates a gap in training regarding the potential for toxicity of local anaesthesia, recognition of systemic toxicity, and the management thereof. These findings suggest the possibility of misdiagnosis and under reporting of LAST.
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.