Topical Refrigerant Spray for IVs: Patient/Provider Responses - Prospective, Double-blind, Randomized Study.

Painful procedures are common. Patients prefer analgesia for painful procedures. Studies indicate that use of a topical refrigerant spray (TRS) prior to needlestick procedures decreases needlestick pain. TRS is easy to apply, inexpensive, has fast onset, and avoids needlestick pain and anxiety, and needlestick injury risk. Patient and health care provider (HCP) acceptance of any technique is essential before it is adopted. This study evaluated the decrease in pain with TRS and the patient and HCP satisfaction and acceptance of TRS for peripheral intravenous (PIV) placement. Adults (N = 300) randomized to placebo or TRS and HCPs (N = 300) placing PIVs answered questionnaires. Patients had significantly less pain than with prior PIVs, and were satisfied with and would use TRS in the future (P < 0.001). HCP felt that patients had significantly (P < 0.001) less pain with TRS than the placebo, and were satisfied with the TRS, and would use TRS in the future.Registered at Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01670487.

Patient and Health Care Provider Responses from a Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Vapocoolant Spray versus Placebo Spray in Adults Undergoing Venipuncture in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Painful medical procedures are common. Topical anesthetics are easily applied, rapid onset, inexpensive, and avoid injection pain and needlestick injury. The aims of this study, using patient and health care provider questionnaires, were to answer the following questions: (1) Does vapocoolant spray decrease venipuncture pain? (2) Would patients be satisfied with and use a vapocoolant spray in the future? (3) Would providers be satisfied with and use a vapocoolant spray in the future? DESIGN: Adults (18-80 years) in a hospital emergency department (ED) were randomly assigned to sterile water placebo spray (S) (N = 50) or vapocoolant spray (V) (N = 50) before venipuncture. Questionnaires were completed by patients undergoing venipuncture (N = 100) and the health care providers (N = 100) who performed the venipuncture (total questionnaires = 200) as part of a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of vapocoolant spray compared with placebo spray in patients undergoing venipuncture in the ED. RESULTS: Patient and venipuncture variables were not significantly different for the two groups (S vs. V). Responses to the questionnaires were significantly different for the S versus V groups for both the patients and the health care providers. Patient questionnaires: Did you have less pain with spray? S 14%, V 76% (p < .001). Compared with previous blood draws, the spray was much more painful/more painful: S 10%, V 6%; same: S 76%, V 16%; less painful/much less painful: S 14%, V 78% (p < .001). How satisfied were you with the spray? Satisfied/very satisfied: S 20%, V 74% (p < .001). Would you use this spray in future? Yes S 20%, V 80% (p < .001). Provider results: The patient had less pain with the use of the spray: S 14%, V 78% (p < .001). How satisfied were you with the use of the spray? Satisfied/very satisfied: S 12%, V 82% (p < .001). Would you use this spray in the future? Yes S 24%, V 84% (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of a vapocoolant spray in adult ED patients undergoing venipuncture significantly decreased venipuncture pain, was associated with high patient and provider satisfaction, and both patients and providers would use a vapocoolant spray in the future for venipuncture and other painful procedures.