Application of Vapocoolant spray for alleviating pain during intravenous cannulation in foreign countries / 中国实用护理杂志

Objective To describe the application of Vapocoolant spray for alleviating pain during intravenous cannulation in foreign countries. Methods We interviewed literature related with Vapocoolant spray for alleviating pain during intravenous cannulation. The databases included China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Data, Web of Science, PubMed. Results It is still controversial that Vapocoolant spray could alleviating pain during intravenous cannulation and there are few studies about Vapocoolant spray in China. Conclusions More high quality randomized controlled studies are needed to provide evidence for the controversy. Provide reference for medical staff with alleviate pain during intravenous cannulation.

The Use of Vapocoolant Spray for the Treatment of Minor Trauma in the Hospital Emergency Department

PURPOSE: Vapocoolant spray is used as an agent to relieve localized pain due to sport injury or intravenous cannulation. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of vapocoolant spray in the treatment of minor trauma in a hospital emergency department. METHODS: We carried out a prospective randomized controlled trial of alert patients with minor trauma who visited our emergency department. The total of 90 participants, all over 14 years old, were divided into 3 groups: a 'NSAIDs IM' group (n=30), 'Vapocoolant spray' group (n=30), and 'NSAIDs IM with Vapocoolant spray' group (n=30). Patients rated their pain and satisfaction of treatment using a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). We assessed pain by VAS 4 times: first upon arrival, and then at 15, 30 and 60 minutes after treatment. We also assessed their treatment satisfaction utilizing VAS at the point of discharge. In addition, we calculated the time between subject arrival and initial treatment. RESULTS: Groups did not differ significantly in terms of age or sex distribution. The mean of the VAS score did not differ significantly among the groups upon their arrival (p=0.885) and were observed as follows: 'NSAIDs IM' group 44.80+/-12.70 mm, 'Vapocoolant spray' group 45.20+/-10.49 mm, and 'NSAIDs IM with Vapocoolant spray' group 46.17+/-9.54 mm. At 15, 30 and 60 min after treatment, the mean reduction in VAS score significantly differed between groups (p<0.05). At 15 min after treatment the results were as follows: 'NSAIDs IM' group 5.27+/-3.26 mm, 'Vapocoolant spray' group 15.17+/-7.17 mm, and 'NSAIDs IM with Vapocoolant spray'group 14.57+/-4.07 mm. At 30 min after treatment the results were: 'NSAIDs IM' group 13.57+/-7.86 mm, 'Vapocoolant spray' group 19.47+/-9.96 mm, and 'NSAIDs IM with Vapocoolant spray' group 21.20+/-6.52 mm. At 60 min after treatment the results were: 'NSAIDs IM' group 25.73+/-8.07 mm, 'Vapocoolant spray' group 20.90+/-9.88 mm, and 'NSAIDs IM with Vapocoolant spray' group 28.93+/-6.66 mm. Satisfaction of treatment and initial treatment time differed between groups (p<0.05). For satisfaction of treatment, the median of VAS significantly differed between the 'NSAIDs IM' group and the 'NSAIDs IM with Vapocoolant spray' group [46.50(41-52) mm vs. 57.00(51-62) mm, p<0.0167]. Initial treatment time significantly differed between the 'NSAIDs IM' group and the other groups [22.50(13-34) min vs. 10.00(7-20) min and 13.00(7-20) min, p<0.0167]. CONCLUSION: Vapocoolant spray is effective in reducing pain with minor trauma in the hospital emergency department. We can simultaneously improve the patient treatment satisfaction and reduce initial treatment time by using the vapocoolant spray.

The Use of Vapocoolant Spray for the Treatment of Minor Trauma in the Hospital Emergency Department

PURPOSE: Vapocoolant spray is used as an agent to relieve localized pain due to sport injury or intravenous cannulation. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of vapocoolant spray in the treatment of minor trauma in a hospital emergency department. METHODS: We carried out a prospective randomized controlled trial of alert patients with minor trauma who visited our emergency department. The total of 90 participants, all over 14 years old, were divided into 3 groups: a 'NSAIDs IM' group (n=30), 'Vapocoolant spray' group (n=30), and 'NSAIDs IM with Vapocoolant spray' group (n=30). Patients rated their pain and satisfaction of treatment using a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). We assessed pain by VAS 4 times: first upon arrival, and then at 15, 30 and 60 minutes after treatment. We also assessed their treatment satisfaction utilizing VAS at the point of discharge. In addition, we calculated the time between subject arrival and initial treatment. RESULTS: Groups did not differ significantly in terms of age or sex distribution. The mean of the VAS score did not differ significantly among the groups upon their arrival (p=0.885) and were observed as follows: 'NSAIDs IM' group 44.80+/-12.70 mm, 'Vapocoolant spray' group 45.20+/-10.49 mm, and 'NSAIDs IM with Vapocoolant spray' group 46.17+/-9.54 mm. At 15, 30 and 60 min after treatment, the mean reduction in VAS score significantly differed between groups (p<0.05). At 15 min after treatment the results were as follows: 'NSAIDs IM' group 5.27+/-3.26 mm, 'Vapocoolant spray' group 15.17+/-7.17 mm, and 'NSAIDs IM with Vapocoolant spray'group 14.57+/-4.07 mm. At 30 min after treatment the results were: 'NSAIDs IM' group 13.57+/-7.86 mm, 'Vapocoolant spray' group 19.47+/-9.96 mm, and 'NSAIDs IM with Vapocoolant spray' group 21.20+/-6.52 mm. At 60 min after treatment the results were: 'NSAIDs IM' group 25.73+/-8.07 mm, 'Vapocoolant spray' group 20.90+/-9.88 mm, and 'NSAIDs IM with Vapocoolant spray' group 28.93+/-6.66 mm. Satisfaction of treatment and initial treatment time differed between groups (p<0.05). For satisfaction of treatment, the median of VAS significantly differed between the 'NSAIDs IM' group and the 'NSAIDs IM with Vapocoolant spray' group [46.50(41-52) mm vs. 57.00(51-62) mm, p<0.0167]. Initial treatment time significantly differed between the 'NSAIDs IM' group and the other groups [22.50(13-34) min vs. 10.00(7-20) min and 13.00(7-20) min, p<0.0167]. CONCLUSION: Vapocoolant spray is effective in reducing pain with minor trauma in the hospital emergency department. We can simultaneously improve the patient treatment satisfaction and reduce initial treatment time by using the vapocoolant spray.

Pain reducing effect of vapocoolant spray during injection and heelstick procedure in neonates / 소아과

Purpose: The aims of this study were to test the efficacy of vapocoolant spray to decrease the symptoms associated with pain in newborns undergoing heel stick and intramuscular injection and compare the pain relief effect of oral glucose. Methods: Randomized, controlled study including sixty newborns undergoing heel stick and intramuscular injection. Group 1 was heelsticked, Group 2 was intramuscular injected, Group A did not recieve any treatment, Group B recieved 30% glucose solution orally, Group C was applied vapocoolant spray symptoms and signs associated with pain at heel stick and intramuscular injection were measured with the premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) scale. Results: There was no significant difference in the PIPP score between intramuscular injected group control and heel stick group control (P=0.07). The mean PIPP score of Group 1A (control) 10.6+/-2.4, Group 1B 5.5+/-2.0, Group 1C 5.2+/-1.8. The mean PIPP score 1B and 1C were significantly lower than control (1B P<0.001, 1C P<0.001). The mean PIPP score of Group 2A (control) 12.5+/-1.4, Group 2B 7.0+/-1.7, Group 2C 6.4+/-1.6. The mean PIPP score 2B and 2C were significantly lower than control (2B P<0.001, 2C P<0.001). Conclusion: The antinociceptive effect of vapocoolant sparay is as effective as 30% oral glucose solution for pain control. So this study support the use of vapocoolant spray for reducing pain during painful procedure in the neonatal intensive care units.