↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of buffered and unbuffered local anaesthesia for inguinal hernia repair: a prospective study

Overview of attention for article published in Hernia, January 2006
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 Mendeley
Title
Comparison of buffered and unbuffered local anaesthesia for inguinal hernia repair: a prospective study
Published in
Hernia, January 2006
DOI 10.1007/s10029-005-0058-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

E. L. Ball, P. Sanjay, A. Woodward

Abstract

Bicarbonate buffered local anaesthetic solutions are known to reduce the pain of infiltration. However, its efficacy in reducing the pain of infiltration in patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair has never been tested. This study aims to test the efficacy of bicarbonate buffered solution in reducing the pain of infiltration and pain for the total surgical procedure in a series of patients undergoing elective inguinal hernia repair. Forty consecutive male patients with unilateral, reducible inguinal hernias were studied prospectively. All patients underwent surgery under local anaesthesia, the first 20 with unbuffered solution and the next 20 using buffered solution. Pain scores were obtained for the infiltration in the anaesthetic room and for the total surgical procedure. In addition, satisfaction scores were obtained at the end of the procedure. The mean pain score for the initial infiltration of unbuffered anaesthetic was 3.00 (range 0-5), and for the buffered anaesthetic it was 1.45 (range 0-4), P=0.02. The mean pain score for the entire procedure for the unbuffered group was 3.05 (range 0-6), and for the buffered group it was 1.45 (range 0-5), P=0.02. The patient satisfaction rate was higher with the buffered solution compared to unbuffered solution (P<0.05). There were no complications reported with either solution. Buffered local anaesthetic solution significantly reduces the perceived pain of inguinal hernia repair, both during the infiltration and during the procedure itself. It is safe to administer and it results in a high rate of patient satisfaction.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 30%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 20%
Student > Postgraduate 1 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 10%
Other 2 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 60%
Psychology 2 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 June 2013.
All research outputs
#9,074,269
of 11,334,759 outputs
Outputs from Hernia
#346
of 493 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,598
of 133,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Hernia
#5
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,334,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 493 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 133,674 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.