Author, date and country | Patient group | Study type (level of evidence) | Outcomes | Key results | Study Weaknesses |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Suder, P. et al. 1995 Denmark | 52 patients with secondary traumatic shoulder dislocation 26 20ml 1% lidocaine 26- IV pethidine/diazepam | Prospective, randomised | Successful reduction | 18/26 (IAL) v 22/26 (sedation) p= 0.19 | Randomisation by sealed envelopes. Small study numbers |
Average pain score (visual analogue scale) | 32.3mm (IAL) v 47.3mm (sedation) p= 0.08 | ||||
Time for reduction | 16.1 mins (IAL) v 4.7 mins (sedation) p= 0.001 | ||||
Complications | 0 (IAL) v 3 (IV)- respiratory depression p= 0.24 | ||||
Matthews, D.E. and Roberts, T. 1995 USA | 30 patients presenting with acute anterior shoulder dislocation. 15- intra-articular lidocaine 15- IV morphine and midazolam | Prospective, randomised trial | Time of reduction manoeuvre | No statistical difference | Patients randomised by picking a page at random from the protocol notebook. P values not presented for all results |
Difficulty of reduction | Easy 10 (IAL) v 7 (sedation), Tough 5 (IAL) v 6 (sedation) Very tough 0 (IAL) v 2 (sedation) | ||||
Subjective pain (1-10 Likert scale) | 4.5 (IAL) v 5.2 (sedation) | ||||
Complications | 0 (IAL) v 3 (sedation)- nausea, flumazenil | ||||
Time spent in ED | 78 mins (IAL) v 186 mins (sedation) p= 0.004) | ||||
Total cost | $117-133 (IAL) v $159.55-240.55 (sedation) | ||||
Kosnik et al. 1999 USA | 49 patients presenting with an acute anterior shoulder joint dislocation. 20 IV analgesia and sedation 29 Intra-articular lidocaine | Prospective, randomised non-blinded clinical trial | Primary outcome successful radiographic reduction | 20/20 successfully reduced (IV) v 24/29 (IAL) p = 0.16 | Low study numbers. Non blinded therefore risk of bias. Unable to achieve target study power ultimately underpowered study. Level of experience for those managing patient not recorded. Most cases managed by orthopaedics not a true reflection of ED practice. Risk of significant bias doctors aware of approach and may unconsciously (or consciously) over or under score for pain and ease of reduction |
Secondary outcomes - Ease of reduction (subjective 10-point visual scale) | Mean ease of reduction 3.32 (IV) v 4.45 (LA) p = 0.12 | ||||
Pain associated with reduction (subjective 1-10 scale) | Mean pain score 3.95 (IV) v 4.90 (IAL) p = 0.18 | ||||
Time delay to treatment | Mean time delay 3.77 (IV) v 5.71 (IAL) p = 0.49 | ||||
Reduction success rate at 5.5 hours | 100% (IV) v78.24% (IAL) p<0.00001 | ||||
Miller et al. 2002 USA | 30 patients aged 18 70 years old presenting with acute anterior shoulder joint dislocation. 16 20ml intra-articular injection of 1% lidocaine 14 IV sedation (midazolam and fentanyl) | Multi-centre prospective, randomised study | Pain intensity (1-10) | 7 (IAL) v 7.4 (sedation) p = 0.37 | Small patient numbers. Outcomes not explicitly stated. No long term follow up for complications. Does not state who carried out the intra-articular joint injection. No description of staff education to carry out intra-articular injections effectively and safely |
Side-effects | None observed in either group | ||||
Time to discharge | 75 mins (IAL) v 185 mins (sedation) p<0.01 | ||||
Cost | $0.52 (IAL) v $97.64 (sedation) | ||||
Time for reduction (using Stimson weighted bag technique) | 11.4 mins (IAL) v 8.5 mins (sedation) p = 0.42 | ||||
Orlinsky et al. 2002 USA | 54 patients between the ages of 18-80 years old presenting with anterior shoulder dislocation. 29 Intra-articular lidocaine 25 IV analgesia and sedation (Meperidine/Diazepam) | Prospective, randomised, non-blinded study | Pain | Improved pre-reduction pain relief in the IV group compared to intra-articular (p = 0.045) | Under-recruited, as aiming for 250 participants. Outcomes not specifically stated |
Recovery time post reduction | Mean time 103 mins (IAL) v 154 mins (IV) p = 0.025 | ||||
Pradhan et al. 2006 Nepal | 45 patients aged 17 55 presenting with acute anterior shoulder dislocation. 23- 20ml 1% intra-articular lidocaine 22- IV propofol +/- pethidine | Non-randomised, prospective study | Time to reduce | 18.82 mins (IAL) v 4.55 mins (sedation) p= <0.01 | Small study numbers. Reductions carried out by orthopaedic surgeon. Pethidine less commonly used in the UK setting. Patient allocations not obviously stated. No specific results for some outcomes stated no results for pain intensity |
Cost | 150 rupees (IAL) v Rs. 400 rupees (IV) | ||||
Complications | 0 (IAL) v 2 (sedation)- overnight admission | ||||
Moharari et al. 2007 Iran | 48 patients aged 18 80 years old presenting to a single ED with acute traumatic anterior shoulder joint dislocation. 24 - Intra-articular injection (20ml 1% lidocaine) 24 IV meperidine/diazepam | Non-blinded randomised clinical trial | Pain score change before injection to after reduction (0-100mm visual scale) | 66.2mm (IAL) v 70.2mm (sedation) p= 0.47 | Low study numbers. Some patients in the intra-articular injection group found to have taken additional analgesia, which will affect overall results. No follow-up to assess potential longer term complications |
Complications | 3 (IAL)- drowsiness v 14 (sedation)- drowsiness, respiratory depression, hypotension, headache, nausea, paraesthesia p = 0.001 | ||||
Time in department | 140.6 mins (IAL) v 216.5 mins (sedation) p= 0.018 | ||||
Hames, McLeod and Millard 2011 Canada | 44 patients greater than 16 years old presenting with an acute anterior shoulder joint dislocation. 25 - Intra-articular injection (4mg/kg 1% lidocaine) 19 Intravenous sedation (choice at doctors discretion) | Prospective, randomised | Length of ED stay | 170 mins (IAL) v 145 mins (sedation) p= 0.46 | Landmark technique for LA joint injection Potential for poor localisation, particularly in overweight patients. Physicians lacked experience with IAL. No objective method for ensuring analgesia achieved in intra-articular group. Impossible to blind patients/doctors to a particular treatment arm. 52% of those receiving intra-articular lidocaine received pre-procedural analgesia (Morphine, ketorolac or fentanyl) Reduces reliability of results as not truly due to intra-articular effects alone. Small study size. Of the 242 patients planned for enrolment, only 18.2% (44) were included. Poor follow-up rates: 28/44 (63.6%) |
Rate of successful closed reductions | 48% (IAL) v 100% (sedation) p= <0.001 | ||||
Patient satisfaction (patient extremely satisfied) | 48% (IAL) v 79% (sedation) | ||||
Ease of reduction (physician extremely satisfied) | 24% (IAL) v 68% (sedation) | ||||
Immediate and delayed complications | No immediate/Delayed complications in either group | ||||
Cheok, Mohamad and Ahmad 2011 Malaysia | 63 patients aged greater than or equal to 15 years presenting with acute anterior shoulder dislocation. 32- intra-articular lidocaine 31- intravenous sedation | Prospective, randomised study | Successful reduction | 81% (IAL) v 100% (sedation) p=0.024 | Single centre study. Randomisation performed via sealed envelopes |
Complications | 0% (IAL) v 29% (sedation)- respiratory depression, vomiting, allergy, thrombophlebitis p=0.001 | ||||
Patient satisfaction | 69% (IAL) v 90% (sedation) p=0.09 | ||||
Visual analogue scale pain reduction | -6.07 (LA) v -5.4 (sedation) p=0.44 for first time dislocation; -4.50 (LA) v 5.62 (sedation) for recurrent dislocators p= 0.2 | ||||
Duration of hospitalisation | 2.2 hours (LA) v 8.1 hours (sedation) p= 0.001 | ||||
Cost | $10 (LA) v $31 (sedation) p=0.00 | ||||
Kashani et al. 2016 Turkey | 104 patients age d18 40 years old presenting with acute anterior shoulder dislocation. 52 Intra-articular 20ml 1% lidocaine injection 52 IV sedation and analgesia (Midazolam and fentanyl) | Prospective clinical trial | Patient satisfaction: complete dissatisfaction | 9 (IAL) v 0 (sedation) p=0.007. Reason: Patient preference for reduced consciousness | No evidence to show education on the technique for injecting lidocaine No baseline equality, with differing colleagues potentially having more experience and better analgesic effects. Use of only one reduction technique (Leidelmeyer) unlikely to be best approach for every patient therefore affecting pain intensities + satisfaction scores. 45.2% were recurrent dislocators likely to have an easier patient journey and depending on group assigned, will skew results |
Pain intensity during reduction (visual pain scale 0-10) | 0.29 (IAL) v 2.92 (sedation) p less than 0.001 | ||||
Discharge within 30 minutes | 59.6% (IAL) v 19.2% (sedation) p= less than 0.001 | ||||
Side-effects during and after reduction | 0 (IAL) v 15 (sedation)- nausea, apnoea, hypoxia, headache No significant complications at 2-week follow-up | ||||
Milzman, D. et al. 2019 Netherlands | 319 patients with acute anterior shoulder dislocation. 53 Intra-articular lidocaine 266 IV conscious sedation | Retrospective review | Primary outcome: Length of stay in the emergency department | 251 mins (IAL) v 324 mins (sedation) p= less than 0.001 | Retrospective study. Initially 566 patients found, many lost due to uncertainties around medications given |