Author, date and country | Patient group | Study type (level of evidence) | Outcomes | Key results | Study Weaknesses |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hogh 2008 Denmark | 70 patients with fractured hip in ED, 2/3 female, mean age of 80.7. | Prospective observational, Comparison of FIB efficacy performed by junior ED registrars. | Comparison of FIB efficacy performed by junior ED registrars. | The median simple verbal pain Score (0–4) pre-block was 2.2 and this improved to a median of 1.5,15 min post-block (P\0.001) and to1.3, 60 min post-block (P = 0.021). The median pain-free hip flexion pre-block was 15 degrees and this improved to a median of 28 degrees,15 min post-block (P = 0.014) and 37 degrees 60 min post-block (P = 0.030). | Small sample FIB performed on 187 patients but analysed only 70 patients due to loss of data. No blinding No set criteria for competence for junior registrars. |
L Haines 2012 USA | 20 patients with confirmed Hip fracture on X-ray were enrolled with the mean age of 82 years, 11M and 9F. Patient with cognitive impairment and pain score of less than 5 on VAS scale on arrival to ED were excluded | Prospective observational study. | Mean VAS score reduction with ultrasound guided FIB over 8 hrs post block. | The lowest mean pain score of 1.3/10 was achieved at 120 mins. All of the decrease in pain scores was statistically significant, with P-values of 0.029 (time 0 vs. time 10 min); 0.0001 (time 0 vs. time 20 min); 0.0001 (time 0 vs. time 30 min); 0.001 (time 0 vs. time 60 min); 0.0001 (time 0 vs. time 120 min); 0.0001 (time 0 vs. time 240 min); and 0.017 (time 0 vs. time 480 min), respectively. | Convenient sample. Small sample size. Extensive exclusion criterion. Data collected by interventionists causing Bias. Patients with FIB had morphine awaiting x-rays, introducing confounder. No comparison group |
Elkhodair 2011 UK | 137 patients were enrolled in our study (61 women and 76 men), with mean age: 77.2 years) which was carried out at two ED’s | Prospective cohort study. | Primary outcome was a change in the pain score; a difference of more than 3 from the patient’s baseline score was considered to be clinically significant. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, nerve Block complications. | A mean reduction of 3.29 points on the VAS from the baseline was documented at 30 min in 129 cases, P<0.0001). A further reduction of 1.94 points in the VAS was noted at 60 min in 106 cases, P<0.0001) | small sample Operator assessing the VAS scoring thus introducing bias. Post block analgesia required is not mentioned. 31 missing data at 60 minutes in 137 patients. |
H Shahzad 2013 UK | 19 patients were included in the study, mean age was 58.5yrs, 13 female and 6 male. | Prospective, observational study | Primary outcome was significant pain relief and patient satisfaction | Pain score improved from >7 (VAS) to 5.5, 4.5 and 3 at 15mins, 30mins and 45mins. Patient satisfaction was achieved to 4.5 on a scale of 1-5. | Single center, small sample, unclear who is doing the assessment for pain relief and satisfaction |