ObjectiveThis prospective clinical trial was performed to compare the safety and efficiency of intra-articular lidocaine (IAL) versus intravenous sedative and analgesic (IVSA) in reduction of anterior shoulder dislocation.Materials and methodsPatients with anterior shoulder dislocation were randomly divided into 2 groups to receive IAL and IVSA. One group patients received an intravenous dose of 0.05 mg/kg midazolam and 1 μg/kg fentanyl, while the other group received 20 mL intra-articular lidocaine (1%). Patient satisfaction (via a standard 5-choice questionnaire), pain score (based on visual analog scale ranging from 0 to 10 points), comfort reduction, recovery time, and side effects were recorded and compared between the two groups before, during and after the reduction procedure.ResultsTotally 104 patients with acute anterior shoulder dislocation and the mean age of 28.75 ± 7.24 years were included (86.5% male). There was no statistically significant difference between IAL and IVSA groups regarding age (p = 0.45) and gender (p = 0.25). A total of forty-seven (45.2%) patients, distributed in both groups, had a history of anterior shoulder dislocation. A significant difference was seen with regard to diminished pain intensity during reduction in IAL group (p < 0.001); Complications including nausea, apnea, hypoxia and headache were only observed in IVSA group, and there was no adverse effect in IAL group; increased patient satisfaction in IVSA group (p = 0.007); similar success rate at first attempt of reduction in both groups, and a shorter time to discharge in IAL group (p < 0.001).ConclusionIt seems that the use of intra-articular lidocaine for reduction of anterior shoulder dislocation is effective, safe, and time saving in the emergency department and has few complications. It can be considered as the first line analgesia in managing anterior shoulder dislocation.

Background:Uncontrolled hemorrhage is a well-recognized cause of mortality in trauma victims and the control of active hemorrhage is among the initial steps in resuscitation.Objectives:The purpose of this study was to assess the role of a hemostatic agent “celox” in the management of civilian stab-wound trauma.Patients and Methods:In this clinical trial study, 160 patients with penetrating limb trauma were randomly allocated to either the control or intervention group (n = 80, each group). Controls were treated with the simple pressure dressing, while the celox-coated gauze was used in the intervention group. The time for achievement of hemostasis and the amount of bleeding were recorded. Data were analyzed using SPSS Version 21 and Stata 13. A P value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.Results:The mean age of participants was 30.5 and the majority of patients were male (90.6%). The forearm and distal leg were the most sites of injury. Hemostasis was achieved within 5 minutes in 32.5% of the control group and 51.3% of the intervention group. Using the celox-coated gauze significantly reduced the time to hemostasis (P = 0.01). Moreover, the blood loss was significantly lower in the celox group compared to the controls (P < 0.05).Conclusions:Using the celox-coated gauze is able to achieve hemostasis in penetrating limb trauma faster than the conventional pressure bandage. Further research is required to clarify the subset of patients who will benefit the most from this effect in the emergency department.