ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Comparison of topical ethyl chloride spray and subcutaneous 1% mepivacaine for local anesthesia in single-rod etonogestrel implant insertion: an observational study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This observational study examined the association between two local anesthetic techniques-topical ethyl chloride spray and subcutaneous 1% mepivacaine injection-and pain perception during the insertion of the single-rod etonogestrel contraceptive implant (Implanon NXT Methods: A total of 144 women were randomly allocated to receive ethyl chloride or mepivacaine solely to minimize selection bias within an observational design. All procedures were performed by experienced midwives in a primary care reproductive health setting. Overall pain was assessed using a 10-cm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at the end of the procedure. Procedural cost, anesthetic application time and adverse events were recorded. Pre-procedural anxiety and nervousness were assessed using validated VAS measures. Results: No statistically significant differences in overall pain scores were observed between groups. Ethyl chloride required significantly less time to achieve adequate anesthesia (22.1 s vs. 64.6 s; Conclusion: Ethyl chloride spray was associated with shorter anesthetic application time and lower procedural resource use without increasing perceived pain, suggesting that it may enhance procedural efficiency and support workflow optimization in high-demand reproductive healthcare settings.
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.