Search

The American College of Surgeons, the Joint Commission, the Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration all direct surgical departments, including vascular surgeons who supply sclerotherapy services, to develop formal mechanisms to improve the safety of the patient and health care worker (HCW), including integration of new safety technologies. The purpose of the present study was to identify and evaluate new safety technologies for outpatient sclerotherapy for chronic venous disease. Using national resources for patient safety and literature review, the following safety technologies were identified: (1) a safety needle to reduce inadvertent needlesticks to workers, and (2) the reciprocating procedure device (RPD) to reduce iatrogenic injuries to patients. Both devices were evaluated in the clinic, and physician responses were determined. Although the safety sheath of the needle was somewhat bulky and could interfere with the ultrasound transducer, sclerotherapy could be performed with it. The RPD safety device required instruction to show how the RPD functioned (“push-push” to aspirate-inject with the RPD rather than the usual “push-pull” with the conventional syringe), but the RPD permitted better needle control and more precise injections. The RPD was well accepted by physicians who found it to be convenient, safer, and less painful. Subsequently, the involved services successfully integrated these safety technologies into their routine clinical practices. As recommended by the Joint Commission, safety technologies can be successfully evaluated and introduced into the clinic to improve patient and HCW safety during physician-performed syringe and needle procedures, including sclerotherapy.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the new reciprocating procedure device (RPD) is superior to the conventional syringe for the administration of local anesthesia. There were 209 local lidocaine anesthesia procedures randomized between the RDP and the conventional syringe. Outcome measures included administration time, anesthesia pain, procedure pain, and operator satisfaction. The RPD significantly reduced anesthesia administration time by 49% (RPD: 0.68 +/- 0.59 min, Syringe: 1.32 +/- 1.01 min, p < 0.001, 95% confidence interval [CI] for % reduction: 36%-60%), reduced anesthesia pain by 27% (RPD visual analog pain scale score: 4.05 +/- 2.64; Syringe: 5.55 +/- 3.00; p < 0.001, 95% CI 14%-38%), reduced significant procedure pain by 74% (p < 0.001, 95% CI 60%-87%), and improved physician satisfaction by 63% (p < 0.001, 95% CI 53%-74%). The RPD markedly reduces the pain associated with lidocaine anesthesia administration, reduces administration time, and maintains the effectiveness of local anesthesia. The RPD is superior to and significantly more effective than the conventional syringe for the administration of local lidocaine anesthesia.

Greater than 50% of patients report significant pain with intraarticular injection of hyaluronate. The reciprocating procedure device (RPD), also known the reciprocating syringe, has 2 plungers that reciprocate with each other, permitting one-handed operation. The RPD increases physician control of the needle and is proposed to reduce patient pain during syringe procedures.To determine in a randomized controlled trial whether the RPD induces less pain than the traditional syringe during intraarticular hyaluronate therapy for the knee.Eighty intraarticular injection procedures of the knee were randomized to either the conventional syringe or the RPD using hyaluronate sodium derivative (Hylan G-F-20). Outcome measures included physician's estimate of pain, patient pain (Visual Analogue Pain Scale [VAPS]), procedure duration, operator satisfaction, complications, and response to the injected medication.Patients reported 85% more pain than physicians estimated. Fifty-one percent (19/37) of subjects experienced moderate to severe pain with the conventional syringe, while only 14% (6/43) experienced pain with the RPD. The RPD reduced pain scores (RPD VAPS score: 2.12 +/- 2.15; conventional syringe VAPS score: 4.22 +/- 3.25; P0.001), reduced procedure time (RPD: 1.34 +/- 1.09, conventional syringe: 1.90 +/- 1.35 minutes, P0.001), and improved physician satisfaction (RPD VASS Score: 9.02 +/- 0.80, conventional syringe 5.69 +/- 1.33, P0.001).Patients have considerably more pain with intraarticular needle introduction and injectable hyaluronate therapy than physicians estimate. The RPD reduces patient pain, reduces procedure time, and improves needle introduction compared with the conventional syringe for hyaluronate injection therapy for the knee.

When an implanted device is infected, complete explantation of the device system, including lead extraction, is usually required. Superficial problems with wound healing may be managed more conservatively, but distinguishing between a surface process and deeper infection can pose a clinical challenge. We present a case of poor wound healing after an ICD pocket revision procedure, and an allergic reaction to the suture material was found to be the cause. Diagnosis, management, and future implications of suture allergy are discussed.

Objective Hydrodissection and high-pressure injection are important for the treatment of dense connective tissue lesions including rheumatoid nodules, Dupuytren's contracture, and trigger finger. The present study determined the optimal syringes for high-pressure injection of dense connective tissue lesions. Methods Different sizes (1, 3, 5, 10, 20, and 60 mL) of a mechanical syringe (reciprocating procedure device) with a luer-lock fitting were studied. Twenty operators generated maximum pressure with each mechanical syringe size, and pressure was measured in pounds per square inch (psi). Subsequently, 223 dense connective tissue lesions were injected with different sizes of syringes (1, 3, or 10 mL). Outcomes included (i) successful intralesional injection and (ii) clinical response at 2 weeks. Results Smaller syringes generated significantly more injection pressure than did larger syringes: 1 mL (363 ± 197 psi), 3 mL (177 ± 96 psi), 5 mL (73 ± 40 psi), 10 mL (53 ± 29 psi), 20 mL (32 ± 18 psi), and 60 mL (19 ± 12 psi). Similarly, smaller syringes were superior to larger syringes for intralesional injection success: 10 mL: 34% (15/44) vs. 1 mL: 100% (70/70) (p Conclusion Smaller syringes (≤ 3 mL) are superior to larger syringes (≥ 5 mL) for successful hydrodissection and high-pressure intralesional injection of dense connective tissue lesions.

Purpose: We hypothesized that the size of syringe influenced needle control in physician-performed procedures. Materials and Methods: Operators were tested for their ability to control a 1-, 3-, 5-, 10-, and 20-mL syringe and equivalent sizes of the new safety device, the reciprocating procedure device (RPD), using the quantitative needle-based displacement method. Three hundred twenty clinical syringe procedures were then randomized to either a 3- or 10-mL conventional syringe or to a 3- or 10-mL RPD. Patient pain was measured with the Visual Analog Pain Scale (VAPS). Results: Increasing syringe size was associated with the undesirable characteristic of unintended forward penetration (loss of control of the needle in the forward direction) (r2 = 0.97, slope = 2.14, 95% CI: 1.54-2.76, P < 0.002), and unintended retraction (loss of control of the needle in the reverse direction) (r 2 = 0.97, slope 2.15, 95% CI: 1.54-2.76, P < 0.002). In addition, 2-handed operation of a syringe resulted in greater control than 1-handed operation of a syringe (P < 0.001). When 1-handed operation was required, the RPD control syringe reduced unintended penetration by 52.3% (P ≥ 0.001), unintended retraction by 56.8% (P ≥ 0.001), and patient pain by 54.7% (P ≥ 0.001) at each device size. Conclusions: For greater safety and control when operating the conventional syringe, smaller syringe sizes and 2 hands instead of 1 hand should be used whenever possible. If 1-handed operation of a syringe is necessary, a safety technology like the RPD control syringe should be used.

Most thyroid cysts are benign; however, they require aspiration if symptomatic or atypical on ultrasound scanning, and ablation with ethanol injection if recurrent. We have systematically studied the use of new safety technologies for surgical procedures, which protect both the surgeon and the patient. Here, we describe the use of one such technology, the reciprocating procedure device, which enables simpler, safer, more efficient and less painful thyroid cyst aspiration and therapeutic ablation.

Purpose The reciprocating procedure device (RPD) has been demonstrated to be clinically superior to the conventional syringe in deep needle and syringe procedures, including arthrocentesis, aspiration biopsy, and intra-articular injection of hyaluronate and corticosteroid. We hypothesized that this clinical superiority was due to intrinsic design characteristics of the RPD that permitted one-handed operation and enhanced control of the device by the operating physician. Materials and Methods Twenty physicians were tested for their ability to control a syringe and needle during a typical aspiration procedure with the RPD versus the traditional syringe using the validated quantitative needle-based displacement procedure model. Outcomes included unintended forward penetration (loss of control of the needle in the forward direction measured in mm), unintended retraction (loss of control of the needle in the reverse direction), and the ability to generate vacuum. Physicians operated the RPD with one hand and operated the traditional syringe alternatively with one hand and two hands. A nonoperating observer recorded all outcomes and measurements. Results The traditional syringe demonstrated a significant unintended forward penetration of 13.9 ± 2.3 mm (one-handed) and 9.02 ± 3.11 mm (two-handed). The RPD reduced unintended forward penetration to 7.39 ± 1.83 mm (a reduction of 47% and 18% respectively, p Conclusions The RPD with one hand generates vacuum more easily and is better controlled by physicians during typical interventional syringe procedures than the conventional syringe with one or two hands. The RPDs of all sizes are better controlled and superior to conventional syringes for typical interventional syringe procedures, including arthrocentesis and joint injection.