Paracervical block efficacy in office hysteroscopic sterilization: A randomized controlled trial

Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 115, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 26-34

  Chudnoff, Scott ^a   Einstein, Mark ^a   Levie, Mark ^a  

^a ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

LIDOCAINE; PLACEBO; LOCAL ANESTHETIC AGENT;

ADULT; ANALGESIA; ANESTHESIA INDUCTION; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG EFFICACY; FEMALE; FEMALE STERILIZATION; HUMAN; HYSTEROSCOPY; INSTRUMENTATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAIN; PARACERVICAL BLOCK; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SENSATION; UTERINE CERVIX; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; AMBULATORY CARE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTRACEPTION; METHODOLOGY; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; OBSTETRIC ANESTHESIA; PAIN ASSESSMENT;

ADULT; AMBULATORY CARE; ANESTHESIA, OBSTETRICAL; ANESTHETICS, LOCAL; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYSTEROSCOPY; LIDOCAINE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PAIN; PAIN MEASUREMENT; STERILIZATION, REPRODUCTIVE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 74049128707     PISSN: 00297844     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181c51ace     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Soll D, Snyder DP, Tidwell C. In-office procedures: emerging trends and practical issues. OBG Manage 2007;19 suppl:1-12.
2. Syed R, Levy J, Childers ME. Pain associated with hystero-scopic sterilization. JSLS 2007;11:63-65
3. Lopes P, Gibon E, Linet T, Philippe HJ. Hysteroscopic tubal sterilization with Essure intratubal devices: a case-control prospective with inert local anesthesia or without anesthesia. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2008;138:199-203.
4. Pasternak R. Risk assessment in ambulatory surgery: challenges and new trends. Can J Anesth 2004;51(suppl 1):R1-5.
5. Palmer CB. Obstetrical anesthesia. Cal State J Med 1918;16: 175-179
6. Readman E, Maher PJ. Pain relief and outpatient hysteros-copy: a literature review. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2004;11:315-319
7. Lau WC, Lo WK, Tam WH, Yuen PM. Paracervical anaesthesia in outpatient hysteroscopy: a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999;106: 356-359
8. Yang J, Vollenhoven B. Pain control in outpatient hysteros-copy. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2002;57:693-702.
9. Renner RM, Jensen JT, Nichols MD, Edelman A. Pain control in first trimester surgical abortion. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD006712. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006712.pub2.
10. Tangsiriwatthana T, Sangkomkamhang US, Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M. Paracervical local anaesthesia for cervical dilatation and uterine intervention. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 1. Art No.: CD005056. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005056.pub2.
11. Arjona JE, Mino M, Cordon J, Povedano B, Pelegrin B, Castelo-Branco C. Satisfaction and tolerance with office hysteroscopic tubal sterilization. Fertil Steril 2008;90:1182-1186
12. Sinha D, Kalathy V, Gupta JK, Clark TJ. The feasibility, success and patient satisfaction associated with outpatient hysteroscopic sterilisation. BJOG 2007;114:676-683 (Pubitemid 46788664)
13. Levie MD, Chudnoff SG. Prospective analysis of office-based hysteroscopic sterilization. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2006;13: 98-101.
14. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, Egger M, Davidoff F, Elbourne D, et al; CONSORT Group (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials). The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2001;134:663-694 (Pubitemid 32322245)
15. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet 2001; 357:1191-1194 (Pubitemid 32378696)
16. Berthier F, Potel G, Leconte P, Touze MD, Baron D. Comparative study of methods of measuring acute pain intensity in an ED. Am J Emerg Med 1998;16:132-136
17. Bijur PE, Silver W, Gallagher EJ. Reliability of the visual analog scale for measurement of acute pain. Acad Emerg Med 2001;8:1153-1157
18. Gallagher EJ, Bijur PE, Latimer C, Silver W. Reliability and validity of a visual analog scale for acute abdominal pain in the ED. Am J Emerg Med 2002;20:287-290
19. Williamson A, Hoggart B. Pain: a review of three commonly used pain rating scales. J Clin Nurs 2005;14:798-804.
20. Bird SB, Dickson EW. Clinically significant changes in pain along the visual analog scale. Ann Emerg Med 2001;38: 639-643
21. Gallagher EJ, Liebman M, Bijur PE. Prospective validation of clinically important changes in pain severity measured on a visual analog scale. Ann Emerg Med 2001;38:633-638
22. Kelly AM. Does the clinically significant difference in visual analog scale pain scores vary with gender, age, or cause of pain? Acad Emerg Med 1998;5:1086-1090
23. Kelly AM. The minimum clinically significant difference in visual analogue scale pain score does not differ with severity of pain. Emerg Med J 2001;18:205-207
24. Kendrick DB, Strout TD. The minimum clinically significant difference in patient-assigned numeric scores for pain. Am J Emerg Med 2005;23:828-832
25. Salaffi F, Stancati A, Silvestri CA, Ciapetti A, Grassi W. Minimal clinically important changes in chronic musculoskel-etal pain intensity measured on a numerical rating scale. Eur J Pain 2004;8:283-291
26. Miller L, Jensen MP, Stenchever MA. A double-blind randomized comparison of lidocaine and saline for cervical anesthesia. Obstet Gynecol 1996;87:600-604
27. Chanrachakul B, Likittanasombut P, O-Prasertsawat P, Her-abutya Y. Lidocaine versus plain saline for pain relief in fractional curettage: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2001;98:592-595
28. Titapant V, Chawanpaiboon S, Boonpektrakul K. Double-blind randomized comparison of Xylocaine and saline in paracervical block for diagnostic fractional curettage. J Med Assoc Thai 2003;86:131-135