Comparison of pain relief in soft tissue tumor excision: anesthetic injection using an automatic digital injector versus conventional injection
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Mun, Hye Gwang | - |
dc.contributor.author | Moon, Bo Min | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kim, Yu Jin | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-03-07T12:00:34Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-03-07T12:00:34Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2024-02 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 2287-1152 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 2287-5603 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://scholarworks.bwise.kr/gachon/handle/2020.sw.gachon/90560 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Background: The pain caused by local anesthetic injection can lead to patient anxiety prior to surgery, potentially necessitating sedation or general anesthesia during the excision procedure. In this study, we aim to compare the pain relief efficacy and safety of using a digital automatic anesthetic injector for local anesthesia. Methods: Thirty-three patients undergoing excision of a benign soft tissue tumor under local anesthesia were prospectively enrolled from September 2021 to February 2022. A single-blind, randomized controlled study was conducted. Patients were divided into two groups by randomization: the experimental group with digital automatic anesthetic injector method (I-JECT group) and the control group with conventional injection method. Before surgery, the Amsterdam preoperative anxiety information scale was used to measure the patients’ anxiety. After local anesthetic was administered, the Numeric Pain Rating Scale was used to measure the pain. The amount of anesthetic used was divided by the surface area of the lesion was recorded. Results: Seventeen were assigned to the conventional group and 16 to the I-JECT group. The mean Numeric Pain Rating Scale was 1.75 in the I-JECT group and 3.82 in conventional group. The injection pain was lower in the I-JECT group (p< 0.01). The mean Amsterdam preoperative anxiety information scale was 11.00 in the I-JECT group and 9.65 in conventional group. Patient’s anxiety did not correlate to injection pain regardless of the method of injection (p= 0.47). The amount of local anesthetic used per 1 cm2 of tumor surface area was 0.74 mL/ cm2 in the I-JECT group and 2.31 mL/cm2 in the conventional group. The normalization amount of local anesthetic was less in the I-JECT group (p< 0.01). There was no difference in the incidence of complications. Conclusion: The use of a digital automatic anesthetic injector has shown to reduce pain and the amount of local anesthetics without complication. © 2024 Korean Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association. | - |
dc.format.extent | 5 | - |
dc.language | 영어 | - |
dc.language.iso | ENG | - |
dc.publisher | Korean Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association | - |
dc.title | Comparison of pain relief in soft tissue tumor excision: anesthetic injection using an automatic digital injector versus conventional injection | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.7181/acfs.2023.00542 | - |
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | Archives of Craniofacial Surgery, v.25, no.1, pp 17 - 21 | - |
dc.identifier.kciid | ART003051381 | - |
dc.description.isOpenAccess | N | - |
dc.identifier.scopusid | 2-s2.0-85186204911 | - |
dc.citation.endPage | 21 | - |
dc.citation.startPage | 17 | - |
dc.citation.title | Archives of Craniofacial Surgery | - |
dc.citation.volume | 25 | - |
dc.citation.number | 1 | - |
dc.type.docType | Article | - |
dc.publisher.location | 대한민국 | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Anesthesia, local | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Epinephrine | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Lidocaine | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Pain | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Pain management | - |
dc.description.journalRegisteredClass | scopus | - |
dc.description.journalRegisteredClass | kci | - |
Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
1342, Seongnam-daero, Sujeong-gu, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea(13120)031-750-5114
COPYRIGHT 2020 Gachon University All Rights Reserved.
Certain data included herein are derived from the © Web of Science of Clarivate Analytics. All rights reserved.
You may not copy or re-distribute this material in whole or in part without the prior written consent of Clarivate Analytics.