@entity158 relief for reduction of @entity2065 : a prospective randomized study comparing intravenous sedation with intra-articular XXXX .

@entity1 @entity3175 @entity6882 @entity3303 @entity158 @entity2065
OBJECTIVES: The aim was to compare the effectiveness of intra-articular @entity3303 (IAL) versus intravenous @entity6882 and @entity3175 (IVS) in reduction of @entity2065 . DESIGN: This is a prospective randomized study. SETTING: Emergency room setting. @entity1 : Thirty-one dislocations reduced with IVS, whereas 32 @entity1 were reduced using IAL. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The visual analog @entity158 scale was used before analgesic administration and during the closed manipulative reduction. Length of time since dislocation, frequency of dislocation, ease of reduction, @entity1 satisfaction, adverse effects, and duration of hospitalization were recorded. RESULTS: The IVS group had a 100% success rate, whereas the IAL group had a 19% (six of 32) failure rate (P = 0.024). However, there was no significant difference in terms of @entity158 relief (P = 0.23) or @entity1 satisfaction (P = 0.085) between both groups. In addition, @entity1 in the IAL group had a shorter duration of hospitalization and no reported complications, whereas the intravenous group had a longer hospital stay and a 29% complication rate. The cost of IAL was 32% less than the cost for IVS. CONCLUSION: IAL was more cost effective than the IVS method. IAL provided adequate @entity158 and is a viable option for analgesia during reduction of acute @entity2065 .
