Vocalization Assessed by Electrolaryngography Is Unaffected by Topical Lidocaine Anesthesia: A Prospective, Crossover, Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study
Topical anesthesia of the upper airway is often recommended when difficulty in airway management is anticipated. There are published reports, however, of administration of topical anesthesia resulting in complete loss of airway control. Adverse effects are mostly attributed to interference with invo...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Anesthesia and analgesia 2012-04, Vol.114 (4), p.785-790 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 790 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 785 |
container_title | Anesthesia and analgesia |
container_volume | 114 |
creator | Maxwell, Melanie J. English, James D. Moppett, Iain K. McGlashan, Julian A. Norris, Andrew M. |
description | Topical anesthesia of the upper airway is often recommended when difficulty in airway management is anticipated. There are published reports, however, of administration of topical anesthesia resulting in complete loss of airway control. Adverse effects are mostly attributed to interference with involuntary protective airway reflexes, while gross motor function itself generally is thought to be preserved. We hypothesized that if motor control is affected, measurable quantitative changes in vocalization should follow the use of topical anesthesia.
A prospective, crossover, randomized, double-blind study was conducted, in which 24 healthy volunteers each performed 2 vocal exercises, while having their glottic appearance recorded digitally via fiberoptic nasendoscopy. Subjects gargled with 3 test solutions on separate occasions (placebo, 2% lidocaine, and 4% lidocaine) and repeated the vocal exercises and nasendoscopy. The angle between the vocal cords was measured using MB-Ruler®, and the Laryngograph Speech Studio® software was used for vocal parameter analysis.
The only significant changes in voice quality occurred between the control and test groups (P = 0.014). No difference could be found between the placebo and lidocaine groups.
Although gargling with local anesthetic affected vocalization, no pharmacological effect attributable to local anesthetic was observed. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182455b71 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_934275260</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>934275260</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3308-dcef37ccb89449ee4344077ece93b6cfb805967a713b3ffb763057a75425de1e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkd1u1DAQhS0EokvhDRDyDeJmU_yXH3MXlgUqraCCltvIdiZdgzdO7aTV9ol4TBztQiUsS9aRv5mjmYPQS0rOKKP8bf1lfUY0oRw4rZjIc13SR2hBc1ZkZS6rx2hBCOEZk1KeoGcx_kySkqp4ik4Y41QUkizQ7x_eKGfv1Wh9j-sYId0W6z1eOzBj8E6FfX_tr4Matnt8HvFVr7oufR2oSz_Y1ABvbJsa2R5w3UMctxCteodrfBF8HBJtb2GJV0lEfwthib-pvvU7ew_tEn_wk3aQvXe2b_GFUwa0z1a-n91dsvk-Tu3-OXrSKRfhxfE9RVcf15erz9nm66fzVb3JDOekyloDHS-N0ZUUQgIILgQpSzAguS5MpyuSy6JUJeWad50uC07yJHPB8hYo8FP05tB3CP5mSqM0OxsNOKd68FNsJBesTDsmiRQH0sxjBeiaIdhdWldDSTNH1KSImv8jSmWvjgaT3kH7r-hvJgl4fQRUTKvtguqNjQ9cXsiKcvbgf-fdCCH-ctMdhGYLyo3bhswn5zJjhDIiksjm_Cv-Bzg8rL8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>934275260</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Vocalization Assessed by Electrolaryngography Is Unaffected by Topical Lidocaine Anesthesia: A Prospective, Crossover, Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid LWW Legacy Archive</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Maxwell, Melanie J. ; English, James D. ; Moppett, Iain K. ; McGlashan, Julian A. ; Norris, Andrew M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Maxwell, Melanie J. ; English, James D. ; Moppett, Iain K. ; McGlashan, Julian A. ; Norris, Andrew M.</creatorcontrib><description>Topical anesthesia of the upper airway is often recommended when difficulty in airway management is anticipated. There are published reports, however, of administration of topical anesthesia resulting in complete loss of airway control. Adverse effects are mostly attributed to interference with involuntary protective airway reflexes, while gross motor function itself generally is thought to be preserved. We hypothesized that if motor control is affected, measurable quantitative changes in vocalization should follow the use of topical anesthesia.
A prospective, crossover, randomized, double-blind study was conducted, in which 24 healthy volunteers each performed 2 vocal exercises, while having their glottic appearance recorded digitally via fiberoptic nasendoscopy. Subjects gargled with 3 test solutions on separate occasions (placebo, 2% lidocaine, and 4% lidocaine) and repeated the vocal exercises and nasendoscopy. The angle between the vocal cords was measured using MB-Ruler®, and the Laryngograph Speech Studio® software was used for vocal parameter analysis.
The only significant changes in voice quality occurred between the control and test groups (P = 0.014). No difference could be found between the placebo and lidocaine groups.
Although gargling with local anesthetic affected vocalization, no pharmacological effect attributable to local anesthetic was observed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-2999</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1526-7598</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182455b71</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22314690</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AACRAT</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hagerstown, MD: International Anesthesia Research Society</publisher><subject>Anesthesia ; Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy ; Anesthetics, Local - adverse effects ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cross-Over Studies ; Double-Blind Method ; Humans ; Larynx - drug effects ; Larynx - physiology ; Lidocaine - adverse effects ; Medical sciences ; Prospective Studies ; Reflex - drug effects ; Reflex - physiology ; Voice - drug effects</subject><ispartof>Anesthesia and analgesia, 2012-04, Vol.114 (4), p.785-790</ispartof><rights>International Anesthesia Research Society</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf><![CDATA[$$Uhttp://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&PDF=y&D=ovft&AN=00000539-201204000-00018$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwolterskluwer$$H]]></linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttp://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&NEWS=n&CSC=Y&PAGE=fulltext&D=ovft&AN=00000539-201204000-00018$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwolterskluwer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,4609,27924,27925,64666,65461</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=25698132$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22314690$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Maxwell, Melanie J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>English, James D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moppett, Iain K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGlashan, Julian A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Norris, Andrew M.</creatorcontrib><title>Vocalization Assessed by Electrolaryngography Is Unaffected by Topical Lidocaine Anesthesia: A Prospective, Crossover, Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study</title><title>Anesthesia and analgesia</title><addtitle>Anesth Analg</addtitle><description>Topical anesthesia of the upper airway is often recommended when difficulty in airway management is anticipated. There are published reports, however, of administration of topical anesthesia resulting in complete loss of airway control. Adverse effects are mostly attributed to interference with involuntary protective airway reflexes, while gross motor function itself generally is thought to be preserved. We hypothesized that if motor control is affected, measurable quantitative changes in vocalization should follow the use of topical anesthesia.
A prospective, crossover, randomized, double-blind study was conducted, in which 24 healthy volunteers each performed 2 vocal exercises, while having their glottic appearance recorded digitally via fiberoptic nasendoscopy. Subjects gargled with 3 test solutions on separate occasions (placebo, 2% lidocaine, and 4% lidocaine) and repeated the vocal exercises and nasendoscopy. The angle between the vocal cords was measured using MB-Ruler®, and the Laryngograph Speech Studio® software was used for vocal parameter analysis.
The only significant changes in voice quality occurred between the control and test groups (P = 0.014). No difference could be found between the placebo and lidocaine groups.
Although gargling with local anesthetic affected vocalization, no pharmacological effect attributable to local anesthetic was observed.</description><subject>Anesthesia</subject><subject>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</subject><subject>Anesthetics, Local - adverse effects</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cross-Over Studies</subject><subject>Double-Blind Method</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Larynx - drug effects</subject><subject>Larynx - physiology</subject><subject>Lidocaine - adverse effects</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Reflex - drug effects</subject><subject>Reflex - physiology</subject><subject>Voice - drug effects</subject><issn>0003-2999</issn><issn>1526-7598</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkd1u1DAQhS0EokvhDRDyDeJmU_yXH3MXlgUqraCCltvIdiZdgzdO7aTV9ol4TBztQiUsS9aRv5mjmYPQS0rOKKP8bf1lfUY0oRw4rZjIc13SR2hBc1ZkZS6rx2hBCOEZk1KeoGcx_kySkqp4ik4Y41QUkizQ7x_eKGfv1Wh9j-sYId0W6z1eOzBj8E6FfX_tr4Matnt8HvFVr7oufR2oSz_Y1ABvbJsa2R5w3UMctxCteodrfBF8HBJtb2GJV0lEfwthib-pvvU7ew_tEn_wk3aQvXe2b_GFUwa0z1a-n91dsvk-Tu3-OXrSKRfhxfE9RVcf15erz9nm66fzVb3JDOekyloDHS-N0ZUUQgIILgQpSzAguS5MpyuSy6JUJeWad50uC07yJHPB8hYo8FP05tB3CP5mSqM0OxsNOKd68FNsJBesTDsmiRQH0sxjBeiaIdhdWldDSTNH1KSImv8jSmWvjgaT3kH7r-hvJgl4fQRUTKvtguqNjQ9cXsiKcvbgf-fdCCH-ctMdhGYLyo3bhswn5zJjhDIiksjm_Cv-Bzg8rL8</recordid><startdate>20120401</startdate><enddate>20120401</enddate><creator>Maxwell, Melanie J.</creator><creator>English, James D.</creator><creator>Moppett, Iain K.</creator><creator>McGlashan, Julian A.</creator><creator>Norris, Andrew M.</creator><general>International Anesthesia Research Society</general><general>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120401</creationdate><title>Vocalization Assessed by Electrolaryngography Is Unaffected by Topical Lidocaine Anesthesia: A Prospective, Crossover, Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study</title><author>Maxwell, Melanie J. ; English, James D. ; Moppett, Iain K. ; McGlashan, Julian A. ; Norris, Andrew M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3308-dcef37ccb89449ee4344077ece93b6cfb805967a713b3ffb763057a75425de1e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Anesthesia</topic><topic>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</topic><topic>Anesthetics, Local - adverse effects</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cross-Over Studies</topic><topic>Double-Blind Method</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Larynx - drug effects</topic><topic>Larynx - physiology</topic><topic>Lidocaine - adverse effects</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Reflex - drug effects</topic><topic>Reflex - physiology</topic><topic>Voice - drug effects</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Maxwell, Melanie J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>English, James D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moppett, Iain K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGlashan, Julian A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Norris, Andrew M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Anesthesia and analgesia</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Maxwell, Melanie J.</au><au>English, James D.</au><au>Moppett, Iain K.</au><au>McGlashan, Julian A.</au><au>Norris, Andrew M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Vocalization Assessed by Electrolaryngography Is Unaffected by Topical Lidocaine Anesthesia: A Prospective, Crossover, Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study</atitle><jtitle>Anesthesia and analgesia</jtitle><addtitle>Anesth Analg</addtitle><date>2012-04-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>114</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>785</spage><epage>790</epage><pages>785-790</pages><issn>0003-2999</issn><eissn>1526-7598</eissn><coden>AACRAT</coden><abstract>Topical anesthesia of the upper airway is often recommended when difficulty in airway management is anticipated. There are published reports, however, of administration of topical anesthesia resulting in complete loss of airway control. Adverse effects are mostly attributed to interference with involuntary protective airway reflexes, while gross motor function itself generally is thought to be preserved. We hypothesized that if motor control is affected, measurable quantitative changes in vocalization should follow the use of topical anesthesia.
A prospective, crossover, randomized, double-blind study was conducted, in which 24 healthy volunteers each performed 2 vocal exercises, while having their glottic appearance recorded digitally via fiberoptic nasendoscopy. Subjects gargled with 3 test solutions on separate occasions (placebo, 2% lidocaine, and 4% lidocaine) and repeated the vocal exercises and nasendoscopy. The angle between the vocal cords was measured using MB-Ruler®, and the Laryngograph Speech Studio® software was used for vocal parameter analysis.
The only significant changes in voice quality occurred between the control and test groups (P = 0.014). No difference could be found between the placebo and lidocaine groups.
Although gargling with local anesthetic affected vocalization, no pharmacological effect attributable to local anesthetic was observed.</abstract><cop>Hagerstown, MD</cop><pub>International Anesthesia Research Society</pub><pmid>22314690</pmid><doi>10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182455b71</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0003-2999 |
ispartof | Anesthesia and analgesia, 2012-04, Vol.114 (4), p.785-790 |
issn | 0003-2999 1526-7598 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_934275260 |
source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid LWW Legacy Archive; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
subjects | Anesthesia Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy Anesthetics, Local - adverse effects Biological and medical sciences Cross-Over Studies Double-Blind Method Humans Larynx - drug effects Larynx - physiology Lidocaine - adverse effects Medical sciences Prospective Studies Reflex - drug effects Reflex - physiology Voice - drug effects |
title | Vocalization Assessed by Electrolaryngography Is Unaffected by Topical Lidocaine Anesthesia: A Prospective, Crossover, Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T14%3A43%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Vocalization%20Assessed%20by%20Electrolaryngography%20Is%20Unaffected%20by%20Topical%20Lidocaine%20Anesthesia:%20A%20Prospective,%20Crossover,%20Randomized,%20Double-Blind%20Placebo-Controlled%20Study&rft.jtitle=Anesthesia%20and%20analgesia&rft.au=Maxwell,%20Melanie%20J.&rft.date=2012-04-01&rft.volume=114&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=785&rft.epage=790&rft.pages=785-790&rft.issn=0003-2999&rft.eissn=1526-7598&rft.coden=AACRAT&rft_id=info:doi/10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182455b71&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E934275260%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=934275260&rft_id=info:pmid/22314690&rfr_iscdi=true |