Evidence mapPaperPMID 36780438Full record

SynthesisPloS one2023

Efficacy and safety of vapocoolant spray for vascular puncture in children and adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Lan Wang, Liu Fang, Yang Zhou, Xiaofeng Fang, Jiang Liu, Guiyu Qu

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06227052 (Vapocoolant Application for Pain Reduction During Office-based Gynecologic Procedures), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06227052 phase4completednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Vapocoolant Application for Pain Reduction During Office-based Gynecologic Procedures: a Randomized Controlled Trial (VAPOR)

TypeinterventionalSponsorQueen's Medical CenterRan2024 to 2025Enrolled98ConditionsPain With Paracervical Block, Pain With Gynecology Procedure, PainArmsNum Vapocoolant Spray, Placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lan WangSchool of Nursing, Weifang Medical University, Weifang, China.
Liu FangSchool of Nursing, Weifang Medical University, Weifang, China.
Yang ZhouSchool of Nursing, Weifang Medical University, Weifang, China.
Xiaofeng FangWeifang People's Hospital, Weifang, China.
Jiang LiuSchool of Nursing, Weifang Medical University, Weifang, China.
Guiyu QuSchool of Nursing, Weifang Medical University, Weifang, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4281-2985
Weifang Medical University · CNWeifang People's Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the vapocoolants for vascular puncture in children and adults.

methodThe search was carried out in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and The Cochrane Library, from inception to March 2022. Randomized controlled trials comparing vapocoolants to control conditions for participants received intravenous cannulation or arterial puncture were included. Two reviewers independently performed selection of studies, data extraction, and assessment of risk of bias. The analysis was performed using fixed or random-effects model with mean differences or standardized mean difference and risk ratios.

resultsA total of 25 studies involving 3143 participants were included. Compared with control conditions, vapocoolants may not decrease the pain of patients with arterial puncture (SMD = -0.36, 95% CI = -0.92 to -0.19, P = 0.20), but may more effectively relieve pain for adults received vein puncture (SMD = -0.65, 95% CI = -0.85 to -0.45, P < 0.00001). The application of vapocoolant increased the procedural difficulty of medical personnel (RR = 2.49, 95% CI = 1.62 to 3.84, P<0.000 1) and participants were more willing to use the spray in the future (RR = 1.88, 95% CI = 1.34 to 2.64, P = 0.0002). There was no significant difference for the first attempt success rate of the procedure and the occurrence of adverse events.

conclusionsVapocoolant spray may relieve pain in adults received vein puncture and cannot cause severe side effects, but is ineffective in children. It also had no effect on patients with arterial puncture. In addition, the application of spray increases procedural difficulties for medical professionals, but does not decrease first attempt success rate, and many patients would like to use the spray again for pain relief in the future. Thus, more rigorous and large-scale studies are needed to determine its effectiveness in vascular access.

Indexed as

PainPuncturesAdultCatheterizationChildHumansPain ManagementPhlebotomy

Identifiers

PMID36780438
PMCPMC9925002
OpenAlexW4320484227

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.