Randomized-controlled trial to study the equivalence of 1% versus 2% lignocaine in cough suppression and satisfaction during bronchoscopy

Mohd Hadzri Hasmoni, Mohammed Fauzi Abdul Rani, Roslan Harun, Roslina Abd. Manap, Nor Adina Ahmad Tajudin, Fauzi Md Anshar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The optimum lignocaine concentration that can achieve an acceptable level of satisfaction for both bronchoscopist and patient has not been established. The aim of this study was to compare the equivalence of the 2 lignocaine strengths in suppressing cough, and its effect on satisfaction of bronchoscopist and patient during bronchoscopy. METHODS: This was a prospective, double-blind, randomized-controlled study involving patients undergoing bronchoscopy at a single tertiary center. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either lignocaine 1% or 2% for local anesthesia. Bronchoscopy was performed by experienced bronchoscopists from the same center according to a standard protocol. A digital recorder was used to record the number of coughs. Upon completion of a bronchoscopy, both the bronchoscopist and patient charted their overall satisfaction and perception of cough on a 10-cm visual analog scale. RESULTS: All 61 patients' recruited (39 males) completed the study. There were 32 in lignocaine 1% group and 29 in lignocaine 2% group. There was no difference in the mean number of coughs (P=0.749) between the 2 groups. Bronchoscopists' overall satisfaction and perception of cough were equal as well. Similar responses were elicited from the patients when asked to chart their perceptions for both lignocaine concentrations. The only difference (P<0.001) seen was in the median dose of lignocaine given, lignocaine 1% group received half of what was eventually administered to lignocaine 2% group. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of cough and perceived satisfaction for both bronchoscopist and patient, 1% is similar to 2%. Those parameters, however, were achieved with much less dose of 1% compared with 2%. Based on our results we would advocate 1% lignocaine for bronchoscopy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)78-82
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Bronchology
Volume15
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2008

Fingerprint

Bronchoscopy
Lidocaine
Cough
Randomized Controlled Trials
Local Anesthesia
Visual Analog Scale
Patient Satisfaction

Keywords

  • Anesthesia
  • Flexible bronchoscopy
  • Lignocaine
  • Visual analog scale

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Cite this

Randomized-controlled trial to study the equivalence of 1% versus 2% lignocaine in cough suppression and satisfaction during bronchoscopy. / Hasmoni, Mohd Hadzri; Rani, Mohammed Fauzi Abdul; Harun, Roslan; Abd. Manap, Roslina; Tajudin, Nor Adina Ahmad; Anshar, Fauzi Md.

In: Journal of Bronchology, Vol. 15, No. 2, 04.2008, p. 78-82.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hasmoni, Mohd Hadzri ; Rani, Mohammed Fauzi Abdul ; Harun, Roslan ; Abd. Manap, Roslina ; Tajudin, Nor Adina Ahmad ; Anshar, Fauzi Md. / Randomized-controlled trial to study the equivalence of 1% versus 2% lignocaine in cough suppression and satisfaction during bronchoscopy. In: Journal of Bronchology. 2008 ; Vol. 15, No. 2. pp. 78-82.
@article{8a044d3d82cd40c4a43c3d8205387c2c,
title = "Randomized-controlled trial to study the equivalence of 1{\%} versus 2{\%} lignocaine in cough suppression and satisfaction during bronchoscopy",
abstract = "INTRODUCTION: The optimum lignocaine concentration that can achieve an acceptable level of satisfaction for both bronchoscopist and patient has not been established. The aim of this study was to compare the equivalence of the 2 lignocaine strengths in suppressing cough, and its effect on satisfaction of bronchoscopist and patient during bronchoscopy. METHODS: This was a prospective, double-blind, randomized-controlled study involving patients undergoing bronchoscopy at a single tertiary center. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either lignocaine 1{\%} or 2{\%} for local anesthesia. Bronchoscopy was performed by experienced bronchoscopists from the same center according to a standard protocol. A digital recorder was used to record the number of coughs. Upon completion of a bronchoscopy, both the bronchoscopist and patient charted their overall satisfaction and perception of cough on a 10-cm visual analog scale. RESULTS: All 61 patients' recruited (39 males) completed the study. There were 32 in lignocaine 1{\%} group and 29 in lignocaine 2{\%} group. There was no difference in the mean number of coughs (P=0.749) between the 2 groups. Bronchoscopists' overall satisfaction and perception of cough were equal as well. Similar responses were elicited from the patients when asked to chart their perceptions for both lignocaine concentrations. The only difference (P<0.001) seen was in the median dose of lignocaine given, lignocaine 1{\%} group received half of what was eventually administered to lignocaine 2{\%} group. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of cough and perceived satisfaction for both bronchoscopist and patient, 1{\%} is similar to 2{\%}. Those parameters, however, were achieved with much less dose of 1{\%} compared with 2{\%}. Based on our results we would advocate 1{\%} lignocaine for bronchoscopy.",
keywords = "Anesthesia, Flexible bronchoscopy, Lignocaine, Visual analog scale",
author = "Hasmoni, {Mohd Hadzri} and Rani, {Mohammed Fauzi Abdul} and Roslan Harun and {Abd. Manap}, Roslina and Tajudin, {Nor Adina Ahmad} and Anshar, {Fauzi Md}",
year = "2008",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1097/LBR.0b013e31816b653c",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "78--82",
journal = "Journal of Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology",
issn = "1944-6586",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Randomized-controlled trial to study the equivalence of 1% versus 2% lignocaine in cough suppression and satisfaction during bronchoscopy

AU - Hasmoni, Mohd Hadzri

AU - Rani, Mohammed Fauzi Abdul

AU - Harun, Roslan

AU - Abd. Manap, Roslina

AU - Tajudin, Nor Adina Ahmad

AU - Anshar, Fauzi Md

PY - 2008/4

Y1 - 2008/4

N2 - INTRODUCTION: The optimum lignocaine concentration that can achieve an acceptable level of satisfaction for both bronchoscopist and patient has not been established. The aim of this study was to compare the equivalence of the 2 lignocaine strengths in suppressing cough, and its effect on satisfaction of bronchoscopist and patient during bronchoscopy. METHODS: This was a prospective, double-blind, randomized-controlled study involving patients undergoing bronchoscopy at a single tertiary center. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either lignocaine 1% or 2% for local anesthesia. Bronchoscopy was performed by experienced bronchoscopists from the same center according to a standard protocol. A digital recorder was used to record the number of coughs. Upon completion of a bronchoscopy, both the bronchoscopist and patient charted their overall satisfaction and perception of cough on a 10-cm visual analog scale. RESULTS: All 61 patients' recruited (39 males) completed the study. There were 32 in lignocaine 1% group and 29 in lignocaine 2% group. There was no difference in the mean number of coughs (P=0.749) between the 2 groups. Bronchoscopists' overall satisfaction and perception of cough were equal as well. Similar responses were elicited from the patients when asked to chart their perceptions for both lignocaine concentrations. The only difference (P<0.001) seen was in the median dose of lignocaine given, lignocaine 1% group received half of what was eventually administered to lignocaine 2% group. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of cough and perceived satisfaction for both bronchoscopist and patient, 1% is similar to 2%. Those parameters, however, were achieved with much less dose of 1% compared with 2%. Based on our results we would advocate 1% lignocaine for bronchoscopy.

AB - INTRODUCTION: The optimum lignocaine concentration that can achieve an acceptable level of satisfaction for both bronchoscopist and patient has not been established. The aim of this study was to compare the equivalence of the 2 lignocaine strengths in suppressing cough, and its effect on satisfaction of bronchoscopist and patient during bronchoscopy. METHODS: This was a prospective, double-blind, randomized-controlled study involving patients undergoing bronchoscopy at a single tertiary center. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either lignocaine 1% or 2% for local anesthesia. Bronchoscopy was performed by experienced bronchoscopists from the same center according to a standard protocol. A digital recorder was used to record the number of coughs. Upon completion of a bronchoscopy, both the bronchoscopist and patient charted their overall satisfaction and perception of cough on a 10-cm visual analog scale. RESULTS: All 61 patients' recruited (39 males) completed the study. There were 32 in lignocaine 1% group and 29 in lignocaine 2% group. There was no difference in the mean number of coughs (P=0.749) between the 2 groups. Bronchoscopists' overall satisfaction and perception of cough were equal as well. Similar responses were elicited from the patients when asked to chart their perceptions for both lignocaine concentrations. The only difference (P<0.001) seen was in the median dose of lignocaine given, lignocaine 1% group received half of what was eventually administered to lignocaine 2% group. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of cough and perceived satisfaction for both bronchoscopist and patient, 1% is similar to 2%. Those parameters, however, were achieved with much less dose of 1% compared with 2%. Based on our results we would advocate 1% lignocaine for bronchoscopy.

KW - Anesthesia

KW - Flexible bronchoscopy

KW - Lignocaine

KW - Visual analog scale

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=41849118056&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=41849118056&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/LBR.0b013e31816b653c

DO - 10.1097/LBR.0b013e31816b653c

M3 - Article

VL - 15

SP - 78

EP - 82

JO - Journal of Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology

JF - Journal of Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology

SN - 1944-6586

IS - 2

ER -