UKE Medical School
Hamburg, Germany
NCT Number: NCT04378283
This study is designed to assess efficacy and comfort of LET solution vs. EMLA cream and topical infiltration of lidocaine.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me3 year–18 year
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Hamburg, Germany
Pain caused by repair of torn skin is usually an unpleasant experience for pediatric patients. Analgesia or pain control is conventionally achieved by local anaesthetic infiltration. Local anaesthetics are a class of drugs that interrupt the transmission of electrical impulses along sensory nerves by inactivating sodium channels (Eidelman et al., 2011). However, the infiltration of local anaesthetics, which involves injecting the medication into the skin, may itself cause significant pain and fear in children (Kundu and Achar, 2002, Boettcher et al., 2012).
Pain management has been increasingly recognized as an element of high quality patient care, yet studies have shown deficiencies in pediatric emergency department (PED) pain management in children (Lawton and Hadj, 2014, Fein et al., 2012). Resolution of pain and perception of pain have been documented as one of the top indicators of patient and parent satisfaction and measure of quality of care in the PED (Magaret et al., 2002). Children are particularly susceptible to pain, even when caused by simple procedures (Boettcher et al., 2012). Well-managed pain has been associated with faster recoveries, fewer complications, and decreased use of health care resources (Zhu et al., 2012).
LET gel (lidocaine 4%, epinephrine 0.1%, and tetracaine 0.5%) is a topical anesthetic that is routinely used before laceration repair. LET gel offers many advantages for repair of tissue laceration including epinephrine-induced vasoconstriction, promotion of dry surfaces required for tissue adhesive laceration repair, and reduction of discomfort (MacLean et al., 2007). Topical anesthetics have been shown to improve procedural success rates and reduce procedural times, likely due to decreased patient movement and pain reduction (Taddio et al., 2005). LET has been shown to significantly reduce the need for injecting local anesthetics to the wound site, which is a cause of much anxiety and pain in children (Taddio et al., 2005, Singer and Stark, 2001).
In many PED - as in our department - LET solution and EMLA pretreatment and subsequent lidocaine infiltration are used depending on the personal experience and preference of the physician. The objective of this study is to determine if LET solution is as effective as EMLA and lidocaine infiltration in terms of comfort and effectiveness.
Primary Hypothesis:
LET solution is as effective as EMLA and lidocaine infiltration in controlling pain.
Secondary Hypothesis:
LET solution is superior to EMLA and lidocaine infiltration in terms of comfort.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
The study is designed to evaluate topical anesthetics
EMLA plus infiltration as anesthetic for wound repair.
Time frame: 2 weeks
Pediatric pain scale
Time frame: 2 weeks
Purulent discharge from the surgical site Purulent discharge from wound or drain placed in wound Organisms isolated from aseptically obtained wound culture Must be at least one of the signs and symptoms of infection - pain or tenderness, localised swelling, or redness/heat.
Time frame: 2 weeks
Time from start until wound closure
Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
Other
Acronym: LET
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.