• M A Hegenbarth, M F Altieri, W H Hawk, A Greene, D W Ochsenschlager, and R O'Donnell.
• Department of Child Health & Development, Children's Hospital National Medical Center, Washington, DC.
• Ann Emerg Med. 1990 Jan 1;19(1):63-7.

AbstractLocal anesthetic infiltration is painful and frightening for children. We prospectively compared a topical alternative, TAC solution (tetracaine 0.5%, adrenaline 1:2,000, cocaine 11.8%), with 1% lidocaine infiltration for use in laceration repair in 467 children. Adequate anesthesia of facial and scalp wounds was achieved for 81% of TAC-treated wounds versus 87% of lidocaine-treated wounds (P = .005). TAC was less effective on extremity wounds; 43% had effective anesthesia compared with 89% of lidocaine-treated extremity wounds (P less than .0001). No systemic toxicity was observed. The incidence of wound infection was 2.2% for both TAC and lidocaine. Wound dehiscence occurred in seven TAC- and two lidocaine-treated facial or scalp wounds (4.5% vs 1.8%, NS) and in five TAC- and four lidocaine-treated extremity wounds (20% vs 17.4%, NS). The unusually high rate of dehiscence was due partially to recurrent trauma or coincident infection. TAC was well accepted by patients and parents. We encourage the careful use of TAC as a less painful alternative to lidocaine infiltration for selected scalp and facial lacerations in children.

29 keywords...

hide…