Comparison of Wide-Awake Local Anaesthesia without Tourniquet (WALANT) and Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block in the Plating of Distal Radius Fractures.

IF 0.6
Ömer Torun, Erbil Aydın, Hüseyin Bilgehan Çevik
{"title":"Comparison of Wide-Awake Local Anaesthesia without Tourniquet (WALANT) and Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block in the Plating of Distal Radius Fractures.","authors":"Ömer Torun, Erbil Aydın, Hüseyin Bilgehan Çevik","doi":"10.1055/a-2549-7223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We hypothesised that the WALANT technique can be consistently replicated and does not demand a high level of skill, and it leads to a higher patient satisfaction rate, improved clinical outcomes, and shorter waiting times compared with an IC-BP block.Forty-eight patients with isolated closed DRF were randomly assigned to the WALANT or IC-BP group. Demographic data, fracture classification, suitability for surgery, preoperative pain scores, and waiting times were collected prospectively. Perioperative parameters, clinical outcomes (pain scores, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH] scores), complications, patient satisfaction (Visual Analogue Patient Satisfaction [VAPS] scale), and return to work were assessed.Patients in the WALANT group had significantly shorter waiting times for surgery and postoperative hospital stays than the IC-BP group. No significant difference was found in intraoperative blood loss. The WALANT group had lower pain scores at postoperative weeks 2, 6, and 12. DASH scores improved over time in both groups, with the WALANT group having a significantly lower mean score during the follow-up period. Patients in the WALANT group returned to work earlier, and patient satisfaction was significantly higher.Compared with IC-BP blockade, the WALANT technique offers several advantages in DRF surgery, including shorter waiting times, shorter postoperative hospital stays, lower pain scores, better functional outcomes, faster return to work, and higher patient satisfaction. The WALANT technique offers a safe and effective alternative that eliminates the need for general anaesthesia or tourniquet application. This technique is suitable for DRF surgery because it provides consistent results and does not require a high level of expertise. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm these results and investigate long-term outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":520635,"journal":{"name":"Handchirurgie, Mikrochirurgie, plastische Chirurgie : Organ der Deutschsprachigen Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Handchirurgie : Organ der Deutschsprachigen Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Mikrochirurgie der Peripheren Nerven und Gefasse : Organ der V...","volume":"57 3","pages":"201-210"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Handchirurgie, Mikrochirurgie, plastische Chirurgie : Organ der Deutschsprachigen Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Handchirurgie : Organ der Deutschsprachigen Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Mikrochirurgie der Peripheren Nerven und Gefasse : Organ der V...","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2549-7223","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We hypothesised that the WALANT technique can be consistently replicated and does not demand a high level of skill, and it leads to a higher patient satisfaction rate, improved clinical outcomes, and shorter waiting times compared with an IC-BP block.Forty-eight patients with isolated closed DRF were randomly assigned to the WALANT or IC-BP group. Demographic data, fracture classification, suitability for surgery, preoperative pain scores, and waiting times were collected prospectively. Perioperative parameters, clinical outcomes (pain scores, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH] scores), complications, patient satisfaction (Visual Analogue Patient Satisfaction [VAPS] scale), and return to work were assessed.Patients in the WALANT group had significantly shorter waiting times for surgery and postoperative hospital stays than the IC-BP group. No significant difference was found in intraoperative blood loss. The WALANT group had lower pain scores at postoperative weeks 2, 6, and 12. DASH scores improved over time in both groups, with the WALANT group having a significantly lower mean score during the follow-up period. Patients in the WALANT group returned to work earlier, and patient satisfaction was significantly higher.Compared with IC-BP blockade, the WALANT technique offers several advantages in DRF surgery, including shorter waiting times, shorter postoperative hospital stays, lower pain scores, better functional outcomes, faster return to work, and higher patient satisfaction. The WALANT technique offers a safe and effective alternative that eliminates the need for general anaesthesia or tourniquet application. This technique is suitable for DRF surgery because it provides consistent results and does not require a high level of expertise. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm these results and investigate long-term outcomes.

无止血带全清醒局部麻醉与锁骨下臂丛阻滞在桡骨远端骨折钢板中的应用比较。
我们假设WALANT技术可以持续复制,不需要高水平的技能,与IC-BP阻滞相比,它可以提高患者满意度,改善临床结果,缩短等待时间。48例孤立闭合性DRF患者被随机分配到WALANT组或IC-BP组。前瞻性地收集了人口统计学数据、骨折分类、手术适宜性、术前疼痛评分和等待时间。评估围手术期参数、临床结果(疼痛评分、手臂、肩部和手部残疾[DASH]评分)、并发症、患者满意度(视觉模拟患者满意度[VAPS]量表)和重返工作。与IC-BP组相比,WALANT组患者的手术等待时间和术后住院时间明显缩短。术中出血量差异无统计学意义。WALANT组术后2周、6周和12周疼痛评分较低。随着时间的推移,两组的DASH评分都有所提高,WALANT组在随访期间的平均评分明显较低。WALANT组患者重返工作岗位较早,患者满意度显著提高。与IC-BP阻断相比,WALANT技术在DRF手术中有几个优势,包括更短的等待时间、更短的术后住院时间、更低的疼痛评分、更好的功能结局、更快的恢复工作和更高的患者满意度。WALANT技术提供了一种安全有效的替代方法,无需全身麻醉或止血带。该技术适用于DRF手术,因为它提供一致的结果,不需要高水平的专业知识。需要更大样本量的进一步研究来证实这些结果并调查长期结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信