Jedi Grip Versus Double Operator Technique For Ultrasound Guided Infraclavicular Block
A Prospective, Randomized, Observer-Blinded Comparison Between Single And Double Operator In Ultrasound Guided Infraclavicular Block: Jedi Grip Versus Conventional Double Operator Technique
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
-
Ankara, Turkey, 06600
- Ankara City Hospital
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- undergoing elective hand, wrist and forearm surgery
Exclusion Criteria:
- hepatic or renal failure
- serious cardiac or pulmoner disease
- local or systemic infection
- sepsis
- coagulation disorder
- neurological, muscular or psychiatric disease
- body mass index (BMI) below 18.5 or above 35
- drug and substance abuse
- pregnancy
- refusal of regional anesthesia
- history of allergy to local anesthetics
- mental-motor retardation (inability to consent or assess the visual analog scale(VAS) pain score)
- preoperative long-term NSAIDs or opioid use.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Single
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Active Comparator: Group I
USG guided infraclavicular block with single operator jedi grip technique
|
USG guided infraclavicular block was applied to patients either by conventional two-person technique or by one person Jedi technique according to the allocated group.
On Group I single operator controlled the probe with one hand while controlling the needle and the syringe on the other hand with the Jedi technique.
The needle was held between the index finger and the middle phalanx of the middle finger, and the syringe was held with fingers 4 and 5, with the plunger part to the thumb in the palm.
On Group II, operator used the probe and needle with different hands while an assistant controlling the syringe to aspirate or inject local anesthetic.
|
|
Active Comparator: Group 2
USG guided infraclavicular block with conventional double operator technique
|
USG guided infraclavicular block was applied to patients either by conventional two-person technique or by one person Jedi technique according to the allocated group.
On Group I single operator controlled the probe with one hand while controlling the needle and the syringe on the other hand with the Jedi technique.
The needle was held between the index finger and the middle phalanx of the middle finger, and the syringe was held with fingers 4 and 5, with the plunger part to the thumb in the palm.
On Group II, operator used the probe and needle with different hands while an assistant controlling the syringe to aspirate or inject local anesthetic.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
block performance time
Time Frame: during block application
|
teh sum of imaging and needling time
|
during block application
|
|
block success
Time Frame: during surgery
|
incidence of ( %) surgery with successful anesthesia
|
during surgery
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Sensory block onset time
Time Frame: before surgery
|
Sensory blockage was evaluated and graded; from lateral to the forearm, the volar face of the thumb, volar face of the 5th finger and lateral side of the hand back; for musculocutaneous, median, ulnar and radial nerves, respectively.
Graduation was according to a previously validated 3-point scale using a cold test: 0 = no block, 1 = analgesia (patient can feel touch, not cold), and 2 = anesthesia (patient cannot feel touch)
|
before surgery
|
|
motor block onset time
Time Frame: before surgery
|
blockage was evaluated and graded; with elbow flexion, thumb abduction, thumb opposition, thumb adduction for musculocutaneous, radial, median, ulnar nerves respectively.
Motor blockage graduation was also according to a (validated) 3-point scale: 0 = no block, 1 = paresis and 2 = paralysis.
|
before surgery
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: İsmail Aytac, Ankara City Hospital Anesthesiology Department
Publications and helpful links
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- E-18-1935
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
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.