Randomized trial of diphenhydramine versus benzyl alcohol with epinephrine as an alternative to lidocaine local anesthesia

被引:26
作者
Bartfield, JM [1 ]
Jandreau, SW [1 ]
Raccio-Robak, N [1 ]
机构
[1] Albany Med Coll, Dept Emergency Med A139, Albany, NY 12208 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0196-0644(98)70062-9
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Study objectives: We compared the pain of infiltration and anesthetic effects of .9% benzyl alcohol with epinephrine, 1% diphenhydramine, and .9% buffered lidocaine. Methods: A prospective, randomized, double-blind study comparing benzyl alcohol, diphenhydramine, and lidocaine was carried out on adult volunteers. Each subject received all 3 injections in a standardized manner. Pain of infiltration was measured on a 100-mm Visual analog pain scale and analyzed with a Kruskal-Wallis test. Duration of anesthesia was assessed at 5-minute intervals for a maximum of 45 minutes and compared with the use of survival analysis techniques by a log-rank test. Return of sensation by 45 minutes was evaluated with an exact chi(2) test. All tests were 2-tailed, with significance defined as P<.05. Results: Thirty subjects were enrolled. The diphenhydramine median pain score was 55 mm, compared with 12.5 mm for lidocaine and 5 mm for benzyl alcohol (P=.001). Pairwise comparisons showed that all possible combinations were statistically significant. The 3 anesthetics were different with respect to duration of anesthesia (P<.001). Pairwise comparisons revealed a longer duration of anesthesia for lidocaine than for diphenhydramine or benzyl alcohol, but no significant difference was found between diphenhydramine and benzyl alcohol. Pain sensation returned within the 45-minute study period in only 3 of 30 lidocaine injections, compared with 11 of 30 benzyl alcohol injections and 19 of 30 diphenhydramine injections (P=.001). Conclusion: Benzyl alcohol is a better alternative than diphenhydramine as a local anesthetic for lidocaine-allergic patients.
引用
收藏
页码:650 / 654
页数:5
相关论文
共 19 条
  • [1] ADRIANI J, 1981, SOUTHERN MED J, V74, P694, DOI 10.1097/00007611-198106000-00015
  • [2] THE EFFECTS OF WARMING AND BUFFERING ON PAIN OF INFILTRATION OF LIDOCAINE
    BARTFIELD, JM
    CRISAFULLI, KM
    RACCIOROBAK, N
    SALLUZZO, RF
    [J]. ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1995, 2 (04) : 254 - 258
  • [3] CHANDLER MJ, 1987, J ALLERGY CLIN IMMUN, V79, P983
  • [4] DOUBLE-BLINDED COMPARISON OF DIPHENHYDRAMINE VERSUS LIDOCAINE AS A LOCAL-ANESTHETIC
    DIRE, DJ
    HOGAN, DE
    [J]. ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1993, 22 (09) : 1419 - 1422
  • [5] 1-PERCENT LIDOCAINE VERSUS 0.5-PERCENT DIPHENHYDRAMINE FOR LOCAL-ANESTHESIA IN MINOR LACERATION REPAIR
    ERNST, AA
    MARVEZVALLS, E
    MALL, G
    PATTERSON, J
    XIE, XM
    WEISS, SJ
    [J]. ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1994, 23 (06) : 1328 - 1332
  • [6] LIDOCAINE VERSUS DIPHENHYDRAMINE FOR ANESTHESIA IN THE REPAIR OF MINOR LACERATIONS
    ERNST, AA
    ANAND, P
    NICK, T
    WASSMUTH, S
    [J]. JOURNAL OF TRAUMA-INJURY INFECTION AND CRITICAL CARE, 1993, 34 (03): : 354 - 357
  • [7] VALIDATION OF DIPHENHYDRAMINE AS A DERMAL LOCAL-ANESTHETIC
    GREEN, SM
    ROTHROCK, SG
    GORCHYNSKI, J
    [J]. ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1994, 23 (06) : 1284 - 1289
  • [8] ADMINISTRATION OF LOCAL-ANESTHETICS TO PATIENTS WITH A HISTORY OF PRIOR ADVERSE REACTION
    INCAUDO, G
    SCHATZ, M
    PATTERSON, R
    ROSENBERG, M
    YAMAMOTO, F
    HAMBURGER, RN
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY, 1978, 61 (05) : 339 - 345
  • [9] KIMURA ET, 1971, TOXICOL APPL PHARM, V18, P54
  • [10] MARTIN S, 1996, ACAD EMERG MED, V3, P493