Buffered versus plain lidocaine as a local anesthetic for simple laceration repair

Ann Emerg Med. 1990 Dec;19(12):1387-9. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(05)82603-4.

Abstract

Study objective: Buffered lidocaine was compared with plain lidocaine as a local anesthetic for simple lacerations.

Design: Randomized, double-blind, prospective clinical trial.

Setting: Urban emergency department.

Type of participants: Ninety-one adult patients with simple linear lacerations were enrolled. Patients with allergy to lidocaine and patients with an abnormal mental status were excluded.

Interventions: Each wound edge was anesthetized with either plain or buffered lidocaine using a randomized, double-blind protocol. The pain of infiltration was measured with a previously validated visual analog pain scale.

Measurements and main results: Analysis of pooled data and paired data (using patients as their own controls) revealed that infiltrating buffered lidocaine was significantly less painful than plain lidocaine (P = .03 and P = .02, respectively). There was no significant difference in the anesthetic effectiveness of the two agents during suturing.

Conclusion: Buffered lidocaine is preferable to plain lidocaine as a local anesthetic agent for the repair of simple lacerations.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial
  • Comparative Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Anesthetics, Local / administration & dosage*
  • Buffers
  • Double-Blind Method
  • Emergencies
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Lidocaine*
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Pain / prevention & control
  • Pain Measurement
  • Wounds and Injuries / prevention & control*

Substances

  • Anesthetics, Local
  • Buffers
  • Lidocaine