Fascia iliaca block in the emergency department for hip fracture: a randomized, controlled, double-blind trial.
Analgesia
Hip fractures
Lumbosacral plexus
Journal
BMC geriatrics
ISSN: 1471-2318
Titre abrégé: BMC Geriatr
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968548
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 07 2019
01 07 2019
Historique:
received:
12
10
2018
accepted:
23
06
2019
entrez:
3
7
2019
pubmed:
3
7
2019
medline:
24
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Hip fracture causes moderate to severe pain and while fascia iliaca block has been reported to provide analgesic benefit, most previous trials were unblinded, with subsequent high risks of performance, selection and detection biases. In this randomized, control double-blind trial, we tested the hypothesis that a fascia iliaca block provides effective analgesia for patients suffering from hip fracture. Thirty ASA I-III hip fracture patients over 70 years old, who received prehospital morphine, were randomized to receive either a fascia iliaca block using 30 ml of bupivacaine 0.5% with epinephrine 1:200,000 or a sham injection with normal saline. The fascia iliaca block was administered by emergency medicine physicians trained to perform an anatomic landmark-based technique. The primary outcome was the comparison between groups of the longitudinal pain score profiles at rest over the first 45 min following the procedure (numeric rating scale, 0-10). Secondary outcomes included the longitudinal pain score profiles on movement and the comparison over 4 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 24 h after the procedure, along with cumulative intravenous morphine consumption at 24 h. At baseline, the fascia iliaca group had a lower mean pain score than the sham injection group, both at rest (difference = - 0.9, 95%CI [- 2.4, 0.5]) and on movement (difference = - 0.9, 95%CI [- 2.7; 0.9]). These differences remained 45 min after the procedure and the two longitudinal pain score profiles were parallel both for patients at rest and on movement (test of parallelism for patients at rest p = 0.53 and on movement p = 0.45). The same parallel change in pain scores over time was observed over 24 h of follow-up (test of parallelism for patients at rest p = 0.82 and on movement p = 0.12). These results were confirmed after adjustment for gender, ASA score, and cumulative sums of intravenous morphine received pre-procedure and during-follow-up. In addition, there was no difference between the two groups in total cumulative intravenous morphine consumption at 24 h. Fascia iliaca block following anatomic landmarks may not provide supplementary analgesia for patients suffering from hip fracture, when low pain scores are reported after prehospital morphine. Additional larger trials will help reach definitive conclusion. Clinicaltrials.gov - NCT02433548 . The study was registered retrospectively.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Hip fracture causes moderate to severe pain and while fascia iliaca block has been reported to provide analgesic benefit, most previous trials were unblinded, with subsequent high risks of performance, selection and detection biases. In this randomized, control double-blind trial, we tested the hypothesis that a fascia iliaca block provides effective analgesia for patients suffering from hip fracture.
METHODS
Thirty ASA I-III hip fracture patients over 70 years old, who received prehospital morphine, were randomized to receive either a fascia iliaca block using 30 ml of bupivacaine 0.5% with epinephrine 1:200,000 or a sham injection with normal saline. The fascia iliaca block was administered by emergency medicine physicians trained to perform an anatomic landmark-based technique. The primary outcome was the comparison between groups of the longitudinal pain score profiles at rest over the first 45 min following the procedure (numeric rating scale, 0-10). Secondary outcomes included the longitudinal pain score profiles on movement and the comparison over 4 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 24 h after the procedure, along with cumulative intravenous morphine consumption at 24 h.
RESULTS
At baseline, the fascia iliaca group had a lower mean pain score than the sham injection group, both at rest (difference = - 0.9, 95%CI [- 2.4, 0.5]) and on movement (difference = - 0.9, 95%CI [- 2.7; 0.9]). These differences remained 45 min after the procedure and the two longitudinal pain score profiles were parallel both for patients at rest and on movement (test of parallelism for patients at rest p = 0.53 and on movement p = 0.45). The same parallel change in pain scores over time was observed over 24 h of follow-up (test of parallelism for patients at rest p = 0.82 and on movement p = 0.12). These results were confirmed after adjustment for gender, ASA score, and cumulative sums of intravenous morphine received pre-procedure and during-follow-up. In addition, there was no difference between the two groups in total cumulative intravenous morphine consumption at 24 h.
CONCLUSION
Fascia iliaca block following anatomic landmarks may not provide supplementary analgesia for patients suffering from hip fracture, when low pain scores are reported after prehospital morphine. Additional larger trials will help reach definitive conclusion.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
Clinicaltrials.gov - NCT02433548 . The study was registered retrospectively.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31262265
doi: 10.1186/s12877-019-1193-0
pii: 10.1186/s12877-019-1193-0
pmc: PMC6604210
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02433548']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
180Références
Am J Emerg Med. 1989 Nov;7(6):620-3
pubmed: 2803357
Eur J Emerg Med. 2011 Dec;18(6):340-3
pubmed: 21422933
Int J Emerg Med. 2010 Nov 06;3(4):321-5
pubmed: 21373300
Injury. 2016 Nov;47(11):2490-2494
pubmed: 27609649
PLoS Med. 2010 Mar 24;7(3):e1000251
pubmed: 20352064
Int J Epidemiol. 1999 Oct;28(5):964-74
pubmed: 10597998
Anesthesiology. 2007 Apr;106(4):773-8
pubmed: 17413915
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2003 Jan;58(1):76-81
pubmed: 12560416
J Orthop Traumatol. 2009 Sep;10(3):127-33
pubmed: 19690943
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2014 Sep-Oct;39(5):394-8
pubmed: 25068412
Br J Anaesth. 2013 Jan;110(1):96-106
pubmed: 23059961
Arch Osteoporos. 2014;9:187
pubmed: 24970672
Surg Radiol Anat. 1997;19(6):371-5
pubmed: 9479711
Anesth Analg. 1989 Dec;69(6):705-13
pubmed: 2589650
J Emerg Med. 2007 Apr;32(3):257-62
pubmed: 17394987
Emerg Med Australas. 2010 Feb;22(1):3-8
pubmed: 20015246
Eur J Emerg Med. 2004 Dec;11(6):323-8
pubmed: 15542989
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2008 Nov-Dec;33(6):526-31
pubmed: 19258967
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2009 Nov;53(10):1282-7
pubmed: 19650803
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2003 May-Jun;28(3):203-7
pubmed: 12772137
Can Geriatr J. 2013;16(1):16-21
pubmed: 23440013
Anesthesiology. 2003 Jun;98(6):1415-21
pubmed: 12766651
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2017 May/Jun;42(3):327-333
pubmed: 28059869
Anesth Analg. 1998 May;86(5):1039-44
pubmed: 9585293
Pain Res Manag. 2015 Jul-Aug;20(4):210-2
pubmed: 26125194