A novel needle-free powder lidocaine delivery system for rapid local analgesia

Advancements in transdermal drug delivery: A comprehensive review of physical penetration enhancement techniques

Transdermal drug administration has grown in popularity in the pharmaceutical research community due to its potential to improve drug bioavailability, compliance among patients, and therapeutic effectiveness. To overcome the substantial barrier posed by the stratum corneum (SC) and promote drug absorption within the skin, various physical penetration augmentation approaches have been devised. This review article delves into popular physical penetration augmentation techniques, which include sonophoresis, iontophoresis, magnetophoresis, thermophoresis, needle-free injection, and microneedles (MNs) Sonophoresis is a technique that uses low-frequency ultrasonic waves to break the skin's barrier characteristics, therefore improving drug transport and distribution. In contrast, iontophoresis uses an applied electric current to push charged molecules of drugs inside the skin, effectively enhancing medication absorption. Magnetophoresis uses magnetic fields to drive drug carriers into the dermis, a technology that has shown promise in aiding targeted medication delivery. Thermophoresis is the regulated heating of the skin in order to improve drug absorption, particularly with thermally sensitive drug carriers. Needle-free injection technologies, such as jet injectors (JIs) and microprojection arrays, offer another option by producing temporary small pore sizes in the skin, facilitating painless and effective drug delivery. MNs are a painless, minimally invasive method, easy to self-administration, as well as high drug bioavailability. This study focuses on the underlying processes, current breakthroughs, and limitations connected with all of these approaches, with an emphasis on their applicability in diverse therapeutic areas. Finally, a thorough knowledge of these physical enhancement approaches and their incorporation into pharmaceutical research has the potential to revolutionize drug delivery, providing more efficient and secure treatment choices for a wide range of health-related diseases.

A Needle-Free Jet Injection System for Controlled Release and Repeated Biopharmaceutical Delivery

Swift vaccination is necessary as a response to disease outbreaks and pandemics; otherwise, the species under attack is at risk of a high fatality rate or even mass extinction. Statistics suggest that at least 16 billion injections are administered worldwide every year. Such a high rate of needle/syringe injection administration worldwide is alarming due to the risk of needle-stick injuries, disease spread due to cross-contamination and the reuse of needles, and the misuse of needles. In addition, there are production, handling, and disposal costs. Needle phobia is an additional issue faced by many recipients of injections with needles. In addition to a detailed literature review highlighting the need for needle-free injection systems, a compressed air-driven needle-free jet injection system with a hydro-pneumatic mechanism was designed and developed by employing an axiomatic design approach. The proposed injection system has higher flexibility, uninterrupted force generation, and provides the possibility of delivering repeated injections at different tissue depths from the dermis to the muscle (depending on the drug delivery requirements) by controlling the inlet compressed air pressure. The designed needle-free jet injector consists of two primary circuits: the pneumatic and the hydraulic circuit. The pneumatic circuit is responsible for driving, pressurizing, and repeatability. The hydraulic circuit precisely injects and contains the liquid jet, allowing us to control the volume of the liquid jet at elevated pressure by offering flexibility in the dose volume per injection. Finally, in this paper we report on the successful design and working model of an air-driven needle-free jet injector for 0.2–0.5 mL drug delivery by ex vivo experimental validation.

A Vibrating Cold Device to Reduce Pain in the Pediatric Emergency Department: A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

Pain of intravenous (IV) catheter insertion can be mitigated with appropriate analgesia, thereby avoiding unnecessary distress. Our objective was to compare the self-reported pain of IV catheter insertion in children when using a vibrating cold device (VCD) versus standard of care 4% topical lidocaine cream (TL).

METHODS

This was a 2-arm randomized controlled noninferiority trial with a convenience sample of 4- to 18-year-olds requiring nonemergent IV catheter insertion. Self-reported pain was measured with the Faces Pain Scale-Revised, anxiety with the Child's Rating of Anxiety scale, and observed pain with the Face, Legs, Activity, Crying, Consolability scale. Caregivers and nurses completed satisfaction surveys.

RESULTS

Two hundred twenty-four children were included in the analysis: 114 (90%) of 127 in the VCD group and 110 (89%) of 124 in the TL group. Faces Pain Scale-Revised scores for both groups were equivalent (median, 2.0 cm; interquartile range, 0-5 cm; linear regression difference, 0 [95% confidence interval, -0.82 to 0.82]), as were median Face, Legs, Activity, Crying, Consolability scale scores (difference, 0.33 [95% confidence interval, -0.01 to 0.68]). The time of completion for the IV procedure was significantly shorter for the VCD group compared with the TL group (median, 3.0 vs 40.5 minutes; P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between groups for self-reported state or trait anxiety, success of IV catheter insertion on first attempt, or satisfaction of caregivers or staff.

CONCLUSIONS

A VCD and TL showed equal effectiveness in reducing pain and distress for children undergoing IV catheter insertion. The VCD has the added benefit of quick onset time and an acceptable alternative for caregivers and nurses.

External cold and vibration for pain management of children undergoing needle-related procedures in the emergency department: a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Needle-related procedures are considered as the most important source of pain and distress in children in hospital settings. Considering the physiological and psychological consequences that could result from these procedures, management of pain and distress through pharmacological and non-pharmacological methods is essential. Therefore, it is important to have interventions that are rapid, easy-to-use and likely to be translated into clinical practice for routine use. The aim of this study will be to determine whether a device combining cold and vibration (Buzzy) is non-inferior to a topical anaesthetic (liposomal lidocaine 4% cream) for pain management of children undergoing needle-related procedures in the emergency department.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study will be a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial comparing the Buzzy device to liposomal lidocaine 4% cream for needle-related pain management. A total of 346 participants will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to one of the two study groups. The primary outcome will be the mean difference in pain intensity between groups during needle-related procedures. A non-inferiority margin of 0.70 on the Color Analogue Scale will be considered. A Non-inferiority margin of 0.70 on the Color Analogue Scale will be considered. The secondary outcomes will be the level of distress during the procedure, the success of the procedure at first attempt, the occurrence of adverse events, the satisfaction of both interventions and the memory of pain 24 hours after the procedure. The primary outcome will be assessed for non-inferiority and the secondary outcomes for superiority.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study protocol was reviewed and approved by the institutional review board of the study setting. Findings of this trial will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02616419.

Lidocaine Pretreatment Reduces the Discomfort of Intranasal Midazolam Administration: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Intranasal (IN) midazolam is a commonly prescribed medication for pediatric sedation and anxiolysis. One of its most frequently encountered adverse effects is discomfort with administration. While it has been proposed that premedicating with lidocaine reduces this undesirable consequence, this combination has not been thoroughly researched. The objective of our study was to assess whether topical lidocaine lessens the discomfort associated with IN midazolam administration.

METHODS

This was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial performed in an urban, academic pediatric emergency department. Children 6-12 years of age who were receiving IN midazolam for procedural sedation received either 4% lidocaine or 0.9% saline (placebo) via mucosal atomizer. Subjects were subsequently given IN midazolam in a similar fashion and then rated their discomfort using the Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale (WBS). The primary endpoint of WBS score was analyzed with a two-tailed Mann-Whitney U-test, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven patients were enrolled over a consecutive 8-month period. One child was excluded from analysis due to a discrepancy in recording the drug identification number. Study groups were similar in regard to demographic information and indication for sedation. Subjects who received IN lidocaine reported less discomfort with IN midazolam administration (median WBS = 3, interquartile range [IQR] = 0-6) than those who received placebo (median WBS = 8, IQR = 2-9; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Premedication with topical lidocaine reduces the discomfort associated with administration of IN midazolam (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02396537).

Safety and Efficacy of Needle-free Powder Lidocaine Delivery System in Adult Patients Undergoing Venipuncture or Peripheral Venous Cannulation: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a needle-free powder lidocaine delivery system compared with sham placebo in adults.

METHODS

Adult patients participated in this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either the needle-free powder lidocaine delivery system or sham placebo 1 to 3 minutes before a required venipuncture or venous cannulation. The primary efficacy endpoint measured the analgesic effect of the active system using a pain visual analogue scale.

RESULTS

In 693 adults who completed the study, the needle-free powder lidocaine delivery system was associated with significantly less pain during venipuncture and venous cannulation compared with sham placebo, as demonstrated by a difference between groups in age-adjusted mean pain score (P=0.003). Secondary analyses demonstrating significant differences between groups included the proportion of patients who were pain free, the proportion of responders, and the difference between pain experienced during the current venous procedure compared with the recollection of pain experienced during a prior venous procedure. Use of the active system was not associated with any serious adverse events or any adverse events resulting in study discontinuation. All treatment-related adverse events were mild.

DISCUSSION

This clinical trial demonstrated that use of a needle-free powder lidocaine delivery system resulted in a significant reduction of pain during venipuncture and peripheral intravenous cannulation in adults. Both the predefined primary endpoint and all 3 secondary endpoints were met. The needle-free powder lidocaine delivery system may be an option for analgesia during venous access procedures in adults.

Cutaneous histologic artifact associated with the use of a needle-free anesthesia device for skin biopsy

A needle-free system that delivers lidocaine to the dermis using pressurized gas is often used as an alternative anesthetic for venipuncture and intravenous catheterization in children. This case report illustrates the potential histologic artifacts that may arise when using a needleless device for a cutaneous punch biopsy. We suggest against using a needleless system for pediatric skin biopsies.

Relief of pain and anxiety in pediatric patients in emergency medical systems

Control of pain and stress for children is a vital component of emergency medical care. Timely administration of analgesia affects the entire emergency medical experience and can have a lasting effect on a child's and family's reaction to current and future medical care. A systematic approach to pain management and anxiolysis, including staff education and protocol development, can provide comfort to children in the emergency setting and improve staff and family satisfaction.

A systematic review of faces scales for the self-report of pain intensity in children

CONTEXT

Numerous faces scales have been developed for the measurement of pain intensity in children. It remains unclear whether any one of the faces scales is better for a particular purpose with regard to validity, reliability, feasibility, and preference.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize and systematically review faces pain scales most commonly used to obtain self-report of pain intensity in children for evaluation of reliability and validity and to compare the scales for preference and utility.

METHODS

Five major electronic databases were systematically searched for studies that used a faces scale for the self-report measurement of pain intensity in children. Fourteen faces pain scales were identified, of which 4 have undergone extensive psychometric testing: Faces Pain Scale (FPS) (scored 0-6); Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) (0-10); Oucher pain scale (0-10); and Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale (WBFPRS) (0-10). These 4 scales were included in the review. Studies were classified by using psychometric criteria, including construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness, that were established a priori.

RESULTS

From a total of 276 articles retrieved, 182 were screened for psychometric evaluation, and 127 were included. All 4 faces pain scales were found to be adequately supported by psychometric data. When given a choice between faces scales, children preferred the WBFPRS. Confounding of pain intensity with affect caused by use of smiling and crying anchor faces is a disadvantage of the WBFPRS.

CONCLUSIONS

For clinical use, we found no grounds to switch from 1 faces scale to another when 1 of the scales is in use. For research use, the FPS-R has been recommended on the basis of utility and psychometric features. Data are sparse for children below the age of 5 years, and future research should focus on simplified measures, instructions, and anchors for these younger children.

Pharmacologic approaches for reducing venous access pain in children

A variety of pharmacologic options are available to clinicians who want to provide effective and safe topical local anesthesia to children undergoing venous access procedures. These options can be distinguished on the basis of how they deliver active drug through the impermeable outer layer of skin, the stratum corneum, to pain receptors located in the dermis and epidermis. Three general methodologies are typically used to bypass the stratum corneum: direct injection of local anesthetics, usually via a small-gauge hypodermic syringe; passive diffusion from topical creams or gels; and active needle-free drug strategies that enhance the rate of drug passage into the dermis and epidermis. Examples of the latter mechanisms include heat-enhanced diffusion, iontophoresis, sonophoresis, laser-assisted transdermal passage, and pressurized gas delivery of powdered drug particles. Pharmacologic options in this setting can also be distinguished on the basis of the time to onset of full anesthetic effect. Several available agents induce significant local anesthesia within 1 to 3 minutes of administration, or faster, allowing easy integration into the skin preparation and subsequent venous access procedure. In combination with nonpharmacologic approaches, these agents can be used to dramatically lessen this significant source of pediatric pain.