Background:The role of local analgesics for lumbar punctures (LPs) in pediatric oncology patients has not been specifically studied.Aim: To compare the efficacy of eutectic mixture of local anesthetics (EMLA) cream to 1% lidocaine injection for LPs.
Method:This was a retrospective observational study of all patients receiving either EMLA cream (EMLA group) or 1% lidocaine subcutaneous injection (lidocaine group) in addition to fentanyl and propofol for LPs over 18 months. Demographics, vital parameters, procedural and recovery times, propofol and fentanyl doses, and adverse events were studied.
Results: Two hundred ninety LPs in 49 children were studied: 148 in the EMLA group and 142 in the lidocaine group. There was no difference in demographics or preprocedural parameters between the two groups. LPs in the EMLA group were completed in a shorter time (7.5 minutes [CI 7.0-8.1] vs 9.4 minutes [CI 8.9-9.9]) with a faster recovery time (38.7 minutes [CI 36.9-40.9] vs 43.9 minutes. [CI 41.9-45.9]) as compared with the lidocaine group (P < 0.001). The EMLA group required less maintenance doses (0.54 mg/kg [CI 0.47-0.62] vs 1.14 mg/kg [CI 1.06-1.21]) and total doses (2.58 mg/kg [CI 2.42-2.75] vs 3.12 mg/kg [CI 2.95-3.29]) of propofol as compared with the lidocaine group (P < 0.0001). Adverse events in the EMLA group were less (19% vs 41%) as compared with the lidocaine group (P < 0.0001).
Conclusion:The addition of EMLA cream for procedural sedation for LPs in pediatric oncology patients significantly improves pain management in comparison with 1% lidocaine injection.
K E Y W O R D SEMLA cream, local anesthetic, lumbar puncture, pediatric oncology, procedural sedation
The COVID-19 global pandemic dictated rapid change to outpatient services within our London-based maternity hospital. Coupled with long waiting times in the Consultant-led Antenatal clinic, we aimed to reduce hospital footfall and unnecessary contact with a clinically vulnerable patient population by reducing face-to-face consultations. Numerous specialties have already successfully implemented safe and effective teleconferencing, allowing remote review while reducing the risks posed by face-to-face contact. A target to see at least 15% of women remotely was set to reduce footfall in the Consultant-led Antenatal Clinic. We aimed to reduce face-to-face waiting times to a mean of 30 min. In March 2020, clinics were prevetted by the clinic consultant to carefully select appropriate women suitable for video or telephone consultations. Clinic templates were changed, increasing appointment times by 5–25 min each. ‘AccuRx’ software was tested and used to communicate appointment details and conduct the consultation. In-person waiting times in the clinic and number of virtual consultations over a 3-month period was recorded, along with qualitative feedback from service users and staff through surveys and departmental meetings. Mean waiting times were reduced by 33% from 45–30 min and multiple service-user benefits were noted, including partner involvement, convenience of waiting for appointments at home and removing requirement for childcare. However, limitations of internet connectivity, need for time to prevet clinics and lack of a robust administration system to inform women of their appointment type were highlighted. Further work is required in these areas to ensure sustainability and improvement of this process for the future.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.