| Title |
Randomized comparative trial of cervical block protocols for pain management during hysteroscopic removal of polyps and myomas
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Women's Health, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijwh.s50101 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrea S Lukes, Kelly H Roy, James B Presthus, Michael P Diamond, Jay M Berman, Kenneth A Konsker |
| Abstract |
To evaluate the efficacy of two cervical block protocols for pain management during hysteroscopic removal of intrauterine polyps and myomas using the MyoSure(®) device. This was a randomized, comparative treatment trial conducted by five private Obstetrics and Gynecology practices in the USA. Forty premenopausal women aged 18 years and older were randomized to receive either a combination para/intracervical block protocol of 37 cc local anesthetic administered at six injections sites in association with the application of topic 1% lidocaine gel, or an intracervical block protocol of 22 cc local anesthetic administered at three injections sites without topical anesthetic, for pain management during hysteroscopic removal of intrauterine polyps and/or a single type 0 or type 1 submucosal myoma ≤3 cm. The main outcomes were a composite measure of procedure-related pain and pain during the postoperative recovery period, assessed by the Wong-Baker Faces Rating Scale (0= no pain to 10= maximum pain). The lesion characteristics, procedure time, and adverse events were summarized. A total of 17 polyps and eight myomas were removed in the para/intracervical block group, with diameters of 1.3±0.5 cm and 1.8±0.8 cm, respectively. In the intracervical block group, 25 polyps with a mean diameter of 1.2±0.7 cm and 7 myomas with a mean diameter of 1.9±0.9 cm were removed. The mean tissue resection time was 1.2±2.0 minutes and 1.2±1.4 minutes for the para/intracervical and intracervical block groups, respectively. The mean composite procedure-related pain score was low for both cervical block protocols, 1.3±1.4 in the para/intracervical block group vs 2.1±1.5 in the intracervical block group. During the postoperative recovery period, the mean pain scores were 0.3±0.7 vs 1.2±1.7 for the para/intracervical and intracervical block groups, respectively. There were no serious adverse events. The MyoSure procedure for removal of polyps and myomas was well tolerated, with low pain scores reported for both the para/intracervical and intracervical block protocols. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 51 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 14% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 22% |
| Unknown | 12 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 47% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 14 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 August 2021.
All research outputs
#3,814,345
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Women's Health
#179
of 781 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,308
of 275,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Women's Health
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 781 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 275,282 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.