Circumferential periosteal block versus hematoma block for the reduction of distal radius and ulna fractures: a randomized controlled trial

Purpose To assess the analgesic efficacy of the circumferential periosteal block (CPB) and compare it with the conventional fracture hematoma block (HB). Methods This study was a prospective single-center randomized controlled trial performed in a national orthopedic hospital. Fifty patients with displaced distal radius (with or without concomitant ulna) fractures requiring reduction were randomized to receive either CPB or HB prior to the reduction. Pain was sequentially measured using the visual analogue scale (VAS) across three stages; before administration of local anesthesia (baseline), during administration (injection) and during manipulation and immobilization (manipulation). Further, the effect of demographic factors on the severity of pain was analyzed in multivariate regression. Finally, complications and end outcomes were compared across both techniques. Results Patients receiving CPB experienced significantly less pain scores during manipulation (VAS = 0.64) compared with HB (VAS = 2.44) (p = < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between groups at baseline (P = 0.55) and injection (P = 0.40) stages. Conclusion The CPB provides a superior analgesic effect over the conventional HB with no documented complications in either technique.