RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
A randomised controlled trial of the reciprocating syringe in arthrocentesis.
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 2006 August
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes of arthrocentesis with the new highly controllable, one handed reciprocating procedure syringe compared with a conventional syringe.
METHODS: 100 arthrocentesis procedures were randomised between the reciprocating syringe and the conventional syringe. Outcome measures included patient pain, procedure duration, operator satisfaction, synovial fluid volume, cell counts, and complications.
RESULTS: 50 arthrocentesis procedures with the conventional syringe resulted in a mean (SD) procedure time of 3.39 (1.88) minutes, a mean VAPS (patient pain) score of 5.35 (3.15), and a mean VASS (operator satisfaction) score of 4.88 (1.92); 30 of the 50 subjects experienced moderate to severe pain (VAPS score 5 or greater) during arthrocentesis. In contrast, the reciprocating syringe resulted in a reduced procedure time of 1.94 (1.14) minutes (p<0.001), a reduced VAPS (patient pain) score of 2.54 (1.60) (p<0.001), and an increased VASS (operator satisfaction) score of 8.91 (0.79) (p<0.001). Only five of the 50 of subjects experienced moderate to severe pain with the reciprocating syringe. Synovial cell counts were similar between the two syringes (p>0.05), but there was a trend toward greater volume (greater synovial fluid yield) and fewer red blood cells with the reciprocating syringe.
CONCLUSIONS: Arthrocentesis with a conventional syringe results in moderate to severe pain in 60% of subjects. The reciprocating syringe prevents significant pain, reduces procedure time, and improves physician performance of arthrocentesis. The reciprocating syringe is superior to the conventional syringe in arthrocentesis.
METHODS: 100 arthrocentesis procedures were randomised between the reciprocating syringe and the conventional syringe. Outcome measures included patient pain, procedure duration, operator satisfaction, synovial fluid volume, cell counts, and complications.
RESULTS: 50 arthrocentesis procedures with the conventional syringe resulted in a mean (SD) procedure time of 3.39 (1.88) minutes, a mean VAPS (patient pain) score of 5.35 (3.15), and a mean VASS (operator satisfaction) score of 4.88 (1.92); 30 of the 50 subjects experienced moderate to severe pain (VAPS score 5 or greater) during arthrocentesis. In contrast, the reciprocating syringe resulted in a reduced procedure time of 1.94 (1.14) minutes (p<0.001), a reduced VAPS (patient pain) score of 2.54 (1.60) (p<0.001), and an increased VASS (operator satisfaction) score of 8.91 (0.79) (p<0.001). Only five of the 50 of subjects experienced moderate to severe pain with the reciprocating syringe. Synovial cell counts were similar between the two syringes (p>0.05), but there was a trend toward greater volume (greater synovial fluid yield) and fewer red blood cells with the reciprocating syringe.
CONCLUSIONS: Arthrocentesis with a conventional syringe results in moderate to severe pain in 60% of subjects. The reciprocating syringe prevents significant pain, reduces procedure time, and improves physician performance of arthrocentesis. The reciprocating syringe is superior to the conventional syringe in arthrocentesis.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app