Comfort Score During Ultrasound Guided Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block Placement in Elderly Patients (US-SCB)

March 2, 2015 updated by: Jadranka Pavičić Šarić, Šarić, Jadranka Pavičić, M.D.

Influence of Anesthetic Volume on Comfort Score During US-SCB Placement in Elderly Patients

Results from our preliminary study accepted as e-poster presentation on ESRA (Bordeaux, September 2012.) showed significant difference in Comfort Score during Ultrasound Guided Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus block (US-SCB) between young and elderly population. However, it is unknown whether the difference in Comfort score (1) was associated with reduction of local anesthetic (LA) volume in elderly or it is attributed to elderly population by itself. The aim of the study is to compare the Comfort score during US-SCB placement in elderly patients undergoing upper limb surgery performed with two different volumes of local anesthetics (20 ml vs 32 ml).

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Unknown

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

Involutional changes of brachial plexus in elderly, assessed by measuring the cross-sectional area (CSA) of brachial plexus at the first rib, allowed a 35% reduction of LA volume for an effective US-SCB in comparison with the younger patients (2). Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia becomes an increasingly popular technique and its performance must be as comfortable as possible. Therefore, Comfort score during block placement is extremely important. Comfort Score is consisted of maximum pain intensity (VAS), the satisfaction of the patient and the number of unpleasant events declared by the patients. It is calculated as the sum of each criterion, which was attributed a value of 0 or 1: VAS(<or=30/100, 1; >30/100, 0), number of unpleasant events (0, 1; >or=1, 0) and satisfaction (satisfied or very satisfied, 1; acceptable or unsatisfied, 0). Comfort score of 3 or 2 is considered as comfortable while score 1 or 0 as uncomfortable block placement.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Anticipated)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
50

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact

The name and contact information for the person who can answer enrollment questions for a clinical study. Each location where the study is being conducted may also have a specific contact, who may be better able to answer those questions.

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

  • Croatia
      • Zagreb, Croatia, 10000
        • Recruiting
        • Clinical Hospital Merkur
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Jadranka Pavičić Šarić

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

65 years and older (Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • age over 65 years (Elderly group)
  • upper limb surgery

Exclusion Criteria:

  • refusal of regional anesthesia
  • any neurologic or neuromuscular disease
  • clinical signs of cutaneous infection at the site of needle insertion

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Experimental: Elderly (32 mL LA volume)
Population over age of 65 undergoing upper limb surgery using US-SCB receiving 32 ml of LA (50:50 mixture of 0.5% levobupivacaine and 2% lidocaine).
Procedure: Upper limb surgery
Elderly patients undergoing upper limb surgery received 20 ml of LA volume (50:50 mixture of levobupivacaine 0.5% and lidocaine 2%) for US-SCB. An independent observer unaware of the LA volume recorded maximal pain intensity resulting from block placements, questioned the patients about possible unpleasant events linked to the performance of US-SCB and assessed patient's satisfaction.
Other Names:
  • Lidocaine
  • Chirocaine
  • Levobupivacaine
  • Xilocaine
Procedure: Upper limb surgery
Elderly patients undergoing upper limb surgery received 32 ml of LA volume (50:50 mixture of levobupivacaine 0.5% and lidocaine 2%) for US-SCB. An independent observer unaware of the LA volume recorded maximal pain intensity resulting from block placements, questioned the patients about possible unpleasant events linked to the performance of US-SCB and assessed patient's satisfaction.
Other Names:
  • Lidocaine
  • Chirocaine
  • Levobupivacaine
  • Xilocaine
Experimental: Elderly (20 ml LA volume)
Population over age of 65 undergoing upper limb surgery using US-SCB receiving 20 ml of LA (50:50 mixture of 0.5% levobupivacaine and 2% lidocaine).
Procedure: Upper limb surgery
Elderly patients undergoing upper limb surgery received 20 ml of LA volume (50:50 mixture of levobupivacaine 0.5% and lidocaine 2%) for US-SCB. An independent observer unaware of the LA volume recorded maximal pain intensity resulting from block placements, questioned the patients about possible unpleasant events linked to the performance of US-SCB and assessed patient's satisfaction.
Other Names:
  • Lidocaine
  • Chirocaine
  • Levobupivacaine
  • Xilocaine
Procedure: Upper limb surgery
Elderly patients undergoing upper limb surgery received 32 ml of LA volume (50:50 mixture of levobupivacaine 0.5% and lidocaine 2%) for US-SCB. An independent observer unaware of the LA volume recorded maximal pain intensity resulting from block placements, questioned the patients about possible unpleasant events linked to the performance of US-SCB and assessed patient's satisfaction.
Other Names:
  • Lidocaine
  • Chirocaine
  • Levobupivacaine
  • Xilocaine

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Comfort Score
Time Frame: Up to average 20 min
An independent observer unaware of the administered LA volume assessed Comfort score by evaluating maximal pain intensity resulting from block placement using a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS: 0, no pain-100, maximum or worst imaginable) as well as by recording any unpleasant event during block placement and by recording patient satisfaction using a four-point scale (unsatisfied, acceptable, satisfied and very satisfied).
Up to average 20 min

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Block Placement Time
Time Frame: Up to average 20 minutes
Block placement time was measured as the time elapsing between needle insertion and to last removal of the needle from the patient's neck.
Up to average 20 minutes

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Šarić, Jadranka Pavičić, M.D.

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Study Chair: Matea Bogdanović Dvorščak, MD, Clinical Hospital Merkur, Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
November 1, 2012

Primary Completion (Anticipated)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
November 1, 2015

Study Completion (Anticipated)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
November 1, 2015

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
June 16, 2012

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
June 19, 2012

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
June 20, 2012

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
March 3, 2015

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
March 2, 2015

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
March 1, 2015

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 2012-000261-21

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings