Abstract
PurposeTo assess the analgesic efficacy of the circumferential periosteal block (CPB) and compare it with the conventional fracture hematoma block (HB).MethodsThis 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.ResultsPatients 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.ConclusionThe CPB provides a superior analgesic effect over the conventional HB with no documented complications in either technique.Level of evidenceTherapeutic Level II.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
