The Use of Topical Lidocaine Gel During Intermaxillary Fixation Procedure

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. e475-e477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yeon Jin Jeong ◽  
Ho Jun Kim ◽  
Ho Kwon ◽  
Hyung-sup Shim ◽  
Bommie Florence Seo ◽  
...  
1995 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 246-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael C. Rowbotham ◽  
Pamela S. Davies ◽  
Howard L. Fields

2006 ◽  
Vol 85 (11) ◽  
pp. 1360-1367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingela Danielsson ◽  
Thomas Torstensson ◽  
Gunilla Brodda-Jansen ◽  
Nina Bohm-Starke

2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 143-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan M. Diepenbrock ◽  
Jason R. May ◽  
William Randall Cone ◽  
Elise L. Ehland

This study was designed to compare 2 common techniques for anesthesia prior to facial filler injections to determine which anesthetic method resulted in less pain during filler injections and which was preferred for future treatments. Via a randomized, prospective, split-face design, one side was treated with topical lidocaine gel and the contralateral received nerve block injection(s) to the infraorbital and/or mental nerve with local anesthetic. Hyaluronic acid (HA) filler was used to treat cosmetic deformities of the nasolabial folds, upper, and/or lower lips. Patients were surveyed to quantify the subjective pain during (1) preprocedural anesthesia and (2) injection of HA filler. At 1 week, patients reported which side was perceived as less painful, and his or her future treatment preference. Forty-eight participants (46 women and 2 men) were enrolled. In all, 77% perceived the filler injections with anesthetic block(s) as less painful, 21% recorded injections on the side pretreated with topical anesthesia as less painful, and 2% perceived no difference. Of all participants, 56% preferred local anesthetic injections for future treatments, 33% chose topical anesthesia, and 10% (5 of 48) had no preference. Patients rated the treatment of HA injections after anesthetic block(s) as the least painful method. Although more than half of the patients preferred this modality, the posttreatment survey suggests that there may be other factors contributing to patients’ preferences.


2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (10) ◽  
pp. 1299-1303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helio Francisco Shiroma ◽  
Eduardo Buchelle Rodrigues ◽  
Michel E Farah ◽  
Fernando M Penha ◽  
Jose Carlos Lorenzo ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Prakash Krishnan ◽  
Sancy Mary Sam ◽  
Sanitha Kuriachan ◽  
Nirmala Sethuraman

Background: Cataract is a frequent surgical procedure performed worldwide. The study compared lidocaine 4% drops with 2% gel on surgeon’s comfort, need for supplemental anaesthesia and duration of surgery in patients who underwent manual small incision cataract surgery.Methods: This was a Prospective, Comparison study conducted at a Single centre by multiple surgeons. Patients enrolled for surgeries were divided into Group A: Lidocaine 4% drops 1ml was instilled in the conjunctival sac 5 minutes before surgery and Group B: Lidocaine 2% gel 2ml was applied. Endpoints evaluated were surgeon’s comfort, need for supplemental anesthesia and duration of surgery.Results: The mean duration of surgery for gel was 20±8 minutes as compared to 29±6 minutes with drops (p*- value<0.001). 26 (87%) patients in gel did not require any supplemental anesthesia as compared to 3 (10%) patients in drops. Peribulbar supplementation was required for 20 (67%) patients in drops as compared to 1 (3%) patient in gel (p*- value<0.001). 26 (87%) patients in gel were operated comfortably by the surgeon as compared to 2 (6%) patients in drops. Mild to Moderate discomfort was experienced by the surgeon in operating 27 (90%) patients in drops as compared to 3(10%) patients in gel (p*- value<0.001).Conclusions: The surgeons were more comfortable using gel with least requirement of supplemental anaesthesia and faster completion compared to drops.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document