Search

ObjectivesTo determine the effect of escalating doses of lidocaine infusion with or without added magnesium on pain levels and the duration of pain relief in patients with fibromyalgia (FM).MethodsA retrospective chart review of 74 patients diagnosed with FM who underwent at least three escalating doses of intravenous (IV) lidocaine infusions (5 mg/kg of body weight, 7.5 mg/kg, and 7.5 mg/kg of lidocaine + 2.5 g of magnesium sulfate) was conducted. Each patient’s subjective impression of change in pain intensity and duration of pain relief after each treatment was recorded, along with an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain intensity, immediately before and after each infusion.ResultsShort-term lidocaine analgesia was evaluated by the reduction in NRS pain score according to the patients reported pre- (immediately before treatment) and post-treatment (immediately after treatment) values. There was a statistical difference in the NRS score reduction between doses 5 mg/kg and 7.5 mg/kg of lidocaine (P = 0.009). Long-term analgesia was evaluated at follow-up visits by the patient’s subjective impression of change in pain intensity and duration of pain relief. There was a statistical difference in the percentage of pain relief and the mean duration of pain relief between the treatments with 5 mg/kg and 7.5 mg/kg of lidocaine (P = 0.007 and P = 0.003). Although there was a trend of greater response to magnesium sulfate as a beneficial adjunct to the lidocaine infusion, we were unable to find a statistically significant difference for any of the variables studied.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that escalating doses of IV lidocaine to 7.5 mg/kg safely and effectively reduced the pain with prolonged effect in a significant number of patients diagnosed with fibromyalgia. Larger, prospective clinical studies are required to confirm this finding.

To compare the use of simulator-based and patient-based obstetric ultrasound training.This was a prospective, randomized, single-blinded trial. Eighteen consenting obstetric trainees with minimal previous ultrasound exposure were recruited. Enrolled patients were also fully consenting. Mid-trimester fetal brain anatomy in the standard planes (i.e., biparietal diameter and head circumference, cavum septum pellucidum, posterior fossa, and lateral ventricle) was chosen as a surrogate for all fetal anatomy ultrasound training. Trainees were randomized into two groups according to training method: simulator group (n = 9) or patient group (n = 9). All participating trainees went through the following sequence: a didactic session regarding the required planes; a "real" patient 15-minute pretest; a 45-minute training session with a dedicated ultrasound educator, using either a simulator or a "real" patient (according to the randomized group assignment); and a 15-minute post-test to obtain and label the standard four planes on a "real" patient. All images were stored and then scored by two blinded Maternal Fetal Medicine staff, according to 3 set criteria: image quality, landmarks, and measurements. Each criterion was scored 0 to 15 for a total score of 0 to 60.Pretest competence was similar between the two groups. For each of the two groups there was a significant score improvement following training: real patient (mean score pretest 13.3 vs. post-test 24.6; P0.04) and simulator group (mean score pretest 15.9 vs. post-test 28.9; P0.05). All trainees demonstrated significant overall score improvements (mean score pretest 14.6 vs. post-test 26.6; P0.04) regardless of training method. Trainees were further divided by their initial level of confidence (pretest score ≤5: very unconfident; pretest5: unconfident). The improvement was similar for both groups, but "very unconfident" trainees' performance improved more in the simulator group (mean pretest vs. post-test score 3.5 to 35) compared with the patient group (mean pretest vs. post-test score 2.3 to 25.6) CONCLUSION: Simulator-based obstetric ultrasound training performed as well as real patient training and was found to be especially beneficial for beginner trainees. Simulator-based ultrasound training has a high rate of acceptance by trainees, does not require investment of patient or clinic resources, and warrants consideration as an educational tool for the safe and effective teaching of obstetric ultrasound.

OBJECTIVES Meniscal tears caused by acute trauma or degenerative fraying affect a wide array of individuals. An effective, long-lasting treatment has widely been sought after. Intra-articular corticosteroid injections have been among the methods of controlling pain for more than 60 years. However, such injections tend to produce short-lasting results, with profound effects lasting an average of up to 4 weeks. The purpose of this study was to determine the average duration and magnitude of pain relief after meniscal-targeted injections. METHODS The electronic medical records of 135 patients were accessed for this retrospective chart review. Patients who had meniscal tears or degenerative fraying and were treated with meniscal-targeted injections were selected. Patients' visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores (before and after treatment) were recorded, along with the percentage of pain relief and duration of pain relief. RESULTS Ultrasound-guided meniscus-targeted corticosteroid injections for meniscal tears or degenerative fraying produced 5.68 (SD, 5.28) weeks of pain relief on average, with a decrease in pain from initial to follow-up visits of 2.14 (P

Introduction Instructor-led simulation-based mastery learning of advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) skills is an effective and focused approach to competency-based education. Directed self-regulated learning (DSRL) may be an effective and less resource-intensive way to teach ACLS skills. Methods Forty first-year internal medicine residents were randomized to either simulation-based DSRL or simulation-based instructor-regulated learning (IRL) of ACLS skills using a mastery learning model. Residents in each intervention completed pretest, posttest, and retention test of their performance in leading an ACLS response to a simulated scenario. Performance tests were assessed using a standardized checklist. Residents in the DSRL intervention were provided assessment instruments, a debriefing guide, and scenario-specific teaching points, and they were permitted to access relevant online resources. Residents in the IRL intervention had access to the same materials; however, the teaching and debriefing were instructor led. Results Skills of both the IRL and DSRL interventions showed significant improvement after the intervention, with an average improvement on the posttest of 21.7%. After controlling for pretest score, there was no difference between intervention arms on the posttest [F(1,37) = 0.02, P = 0.94] and retention tests [F(1,17) = 1.43, P = 0.25]. Cost savings were realized in the DSRL intervention after the fourth group (16 residents) had completed each intervention, with an ongoing savings of $80 per resident. Conclusions Using a simulation-based mastery learning model, we observed equivalence in learning of ACLS skills for the DSRL and IRL conditions, whereas DSRL was more cost effective.