Massaging as a pain-relieving intervention before performing intravenous access.

PURPOSE: Pain is "an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience arising from actual or potential tissue damage or described in terms of damage". Stimulating the skin by rubbing, stroking, massaging, or applying pressure near the injection site is pain-relieving. Needle-related procedures induce anxiety, distress, and fear in children and adults. The present study aimed to test the effectiveness of massaging the access site in reducing pain associated with intravenous access. DESIGN: After obtaining institutional ethics committee approval, this prospective randomized single-blinded study was performed on 250 ASA I-II patients 18 to 65 years old, scheduled for elective minor general surgery under general anaesthesia. METHODS: Patients were randomized into the Massaging Group (MG) and the Control Group (CG). A Situational Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) was conducted to evaluate the anxiety levels of the patients. In addition, the skin adjacent to the intravenous access site was massaged for 15 s in circular motions with moderate intensity by the investigator's right thumb before performing the intravenous access in the MG. The CG did not receive any massage adjacent to the access site. The primary endpoint, the intensity of perceived pain, was rated on a non-graduated 10-cm Visual Analogue Score (VAS). FINDINGS: The groups' demographic data and STAI I-II scores were similar. There was a significant difference between the VAS scores of the two groups (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our results support massaging as an effective pain-relieving technique before intravenous intervention. As massaging is a universal and non-invasive intervention that requires no advanced preparation, we recommend massaging before each intravenous cannulation to reduce pain caused by intravenous access.

Mothers Level of Education and Preoperative Informative Story Book Reading Helps Reduce Preoperative Anxiety in Children in Turkey.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the use of a standard story book, compared to an informative story book, as preoperative preparation to relieve anxiety. DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 120 children with ASA I-II, aged 6-8 years, scheduled to undergo elective adenoidectomy, tonsillectomy, and adenotonsillectomy were enrolled in this randomized controlled study. The control group received a non-medical, colorful story book, while the intervention group received an informative story book appropriate for their age. The book was either read by literate children or the mothers of illiterate children. The book was read aloud at least once before the surgery while they were together. The patients' baseline anxiety level was assessed using the modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale (mYPAS) immediately after entering the preoperative holding area (T0). Mothers' anxiety level was assessed using the State and Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Information about the reader, how many times the book was read, the age and education level of the mother, and the presence of a surgical history in the patients' siblings was obtained from the mother through a questionnaire. After premedication with oral midazolam, patients' anxiety level was assessed while entering the operation room (T1). RESULTS: The intervention group had significantly lower mYPAS scores at T0 and T1 than the control group. Those who read the intervention book ≥3 times had significantly lower mYPAS values than those who read 2 times or less. Mothers with a low education level had higher anxiety levels in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Repeatedly informing children by reading an informative story book and higher education level of mothers are the most important factors for relieving preoperative anxiety in children. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Reducing preoperative anxiety is an important factor for children and their families.

The effect of play distraction on anxiety before premedication administration: a randomized trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The majority of children scheduled to undergo surgery experience substantial anxiety in the preoperative holding area before induction of anesthesia. Pharmacological interventions aimed at reducing perioperative anxiety are paradoxically a source of stress for children themselves. Midazolam is frequently used as premedication, and the formula of this drug in Turkey is bitter. We aimed to assess the role of distraction in the form of playing with play dough (Play-Doh) on reducing premedication anxiety in children. DESIGN: Prospective randomized clinical trial. SETTING: Preoperative holding area. PATIENTS: One hundred four healthy children aged 3 to 7 years scheduled to undergo elective surgery were enrolled into the study. INTERVENTIONS: All children routinely receive sedative premedication (oral midazolam) before anesthesia. Children were randomized to 2 groups to receive either play dough (group PD) (n=52) or not (group C) (n=52) before administration of oral premedication. MEASUREMENTS: Children's premedication anxiety was determined by the modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale (mYPAS). MAIN RESULTS: The difference in mYPAS scores between groups at T0 (immediately after entering the preoperative holding area) was not significant (P=.876). Compared with group C, group PD was associated with lower mYPAS scores at T1 and T2 (P<.001). In group PD, mYPAS scores were significantly lower at both T1 and T2 as compared with the scores at T0 (P<.001); they were similar between T1 and T2 (P>.001). CONCLUSION: This study showed that distraction in the form of playing with play dough facilitated administration of oral midazolam in young children.

Effects of pretreatment with esmolol and lidocaine on injection pain and rocuronium-induced withdrawal response.

BACKGROUND/AIM: We aimed to compare the effectiveness of esmolol 1 mg/kg and lidocaine 1 mg/kg for injection pain and for the prevention of rocuronium-induced withdrawal response. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We enrolled a total of 81 patients in the study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either 10 mL of 0.9% NaCl (Group P), esmolol 1 mg/kg (Group E), or lidocaine 1.0 mg/kg (Group L). A subparalyzing dose of rocuronium 0.05 mg/ kg was administered to all patients and its effects were recorded. Anesthesia was induced with intravenous propofol and intravenous rocuronium 0.5 mg/kg in all groups. The withdrawal movements of the patient groups were subsequently graded. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference in overall incidence of pain in group E and L compared to the placebo group after administrating the subparalyzed dose (no pain response: Group E = 81.5%, Group L = 77.8%, Group P = 14.8%) (P < 0.001). After intravenous administration of an intubating dose of rocuronium, the esmolol group had a significantly lower incidence of withdrawal movement than the other groups (no response: Group E = 81.5%, Group L = 63%, Group P = 22.2%) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We found that esmolol significantly attenuates rocuronium-induced withdrawal movement and also reduces pain when used at subparalyzing doses.