CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02217436Updated Jul 23, 2019Results posted

iPad as a Distraction Tool During Facial Laceration Repair

An interventional study of iPad and Standard Care in Anxiety, Laceration Repair and Children, sponsored by University of California, San Diego. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 2 Years to 12 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-07-23.

Sponsored by University of California, San Diego · Not applicable, Interventional, and Supportive care

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
80
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
2 Years to 12 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Children aged 2-12 presenting to the Rady Children's Hospital San Diego (RCHSD) emergency department with facial lacerations requiring suture repair will be eligible to participate in the study. Participating children will be randomized to standard care versus standard care plus iPad use during the procedure. Children's anxiety levels assessed using a validated scale will be measured from video recordings made of the procedure. Parent and provider satisfaction surveys will be completed following the procedure. The primary study aim is to determine how iPad use affects children's anxiety levels during facial laceration repair. The secondary study aim is to determine how iPad use affects parent and provider satisfaction regarding a child's facial laceration repair. Hypothesis is that iPad use decreases children's anxiety levels during facial laceration repair and increases parent and provider satisfaction regarding a child's facial laceration repair.

02

Conditions studied

  • Anxiety
  • Laceration Repair
  • Children

Browse trials for

03

In context

Lacerations

133 studies on the registry are indexed under Lacerations; 29 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 80 is close to the median of 79 across 106 interventional studies indexed under Lacerations.

Browse Lacerations studies →

Lead sponsor

University of California, San Diego is the lead sponsor of 958 studies on the registry; 191 are open to participants now.

Of its 110 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 70 (64%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
2 Years to 12 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  1. Patients: Male and female children aged 2-12 of all ethnic backgrounds and socioeconomic levels presenting to the emergency department for laceration repair. Children sustaining single, uncomplicated facial lacerations, which can be repaired with basic suture techniques, are eligible for the study. Lacerations repaired using LET cream, lidocaine injection, and LET cream and lidocaine injection are all eligible for the study.
  2. Parents of enrolled patients.
  3. Providers of enrolled patients: Residents, fellows, attendings, and nurse practitioners serving as the primary provider performing the laceration repair.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Patients: Lacerations to parts of the body other than the face. Children with developmental disabilities. Children with laceration repair requiring sedation. Children with complex lacerations requiring subspecialty repair.
  2. Parents and/or providers of children not eligible or enrolled in the study.
  3. Providers: Medical students performing the laceration repair.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Supportive care
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
80 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    iPad

    iPad with age-appropriate applications, videos, and music

    Device: iPad · Other: Standard Care

  • Active comparator
    Standard Care

    All study participants will receive standard care, which consists of procedural explanation and preparation by providers, verbal encouragement and comforting by providers and parents, and topical anesthetic (LET) followed by injectable lidocaine administration (whether one or both of these anesthetics will be used will be determined by the provider prior to randomization).

    Other: Standard Care

Interventions

  • DeviceiPad

    iPad with age-appropriate applications, videos, and music

  • OtherStandard Care

    All study participants will receive standard care, which consists of procedural explanation and preparation by providers, verbal encouragement and comforting by providers and parents, and topical anesthetic (LET) followed by injectable lidocaine administration (whether one or both of these anesthetics will be used will be determined by the provider prior to randomization).

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Observational Score Behavioral Distress Revised (OSBD-R)

    Weighted average Observational Score Behavioral Distress Revised (OSBD-R) scored from videotapes of the entire laceration repair procedure Scale 0-23.5 (0 low/better, 23.5 high/worse)

    Time frame: Entire laceration repair procedure

Secondary outcomes

  1. Parent Survey

    Parent rating of own anxiety during the procedure Likert-based scale 1-5 (1 low/better, 5 high/worse)

    Time frame: Survey administered immediately following the laceration repair

07

Results

Posted Jul 23, 2019

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneiPadStandard Care
Started4040
Completed3938
Not completed12
Withdrew: Protocol violation11
Withdrew: Incomplete data01

Outcome measures

PrimaryObservational Score Behavioral Distress Revised (OSBD-R)

Weighted average Observational Score Behavioral Distress Revised (OSBD-R) scored from videotapes of the entire laceration repair procedure Scale 0-23.5 (0 low/better, 23.5 high/worse)

Time frame:
Entire laceration repair procedure
Reported as:
Median · units on a scale
Observational Score Behavioral Distress Revised (OSBD-R)
units on a scaleiPadStandard Care
Observational Score Behavioral Distress Revised (OSBD-R)2.3 (0 to 6.2)0.8 (0.1 to 5.5)
Statistical analysis
  • iPad vs Standard Care · Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney) · p = 0.98
SecondaryParent Survey

Parent rating of own anxiety during the procedure Likert-based scale 1-5 (1 low/better, 5 high/worse)

Time frame:
Survey administered immediately following the laceration repair
Reported as:
Median · score on a scale
Parent Survey
score on a scaleiPadStandard Care
Parent Survey2 (1 to 4)4 (3.8 to 5)
Statistical analysis
  • iPad vs Standard Care · Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney) · p = 0.01

Adverse events

Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
iPad—0/40 (0%)0/40 (0%)
Standard Care—0/40 (0%)0/40 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

Age, Categorical
Age, Categorical(Participants)iPadStandard CareTotal
<=18 years393877
Between 18 and 65 years000
>=65 years000
Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)iPadStandard CareTotal
Mean5.0 ± 2.55.5 ± 2.65.2 ± 2.5
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)iPadStandard CareTotal
Female151025
Male242852
Location of laceration
Location of laceration(Participants)iPadStandard CareTotal
Forehead/eyebrow162339
Lip347
Chin191029
Other112
Number of sutures
Number of sutures(sutures)iPadStandard CareTotal
Mean4.0 ± 2.44.6 ± 2.64.3 ± 2.5
Duration of procedure
Duration of procedure(minutes)iPadStandard CareTotal
Mean15.5 ± 6.516.4 ± 8.416.0 ± 7.5
Topical anesthetic
Topical anesthetic(Participants)iPadStandard CareTotal
Topical373471
No topical246
Use of restraint
Use of restraint(Participants)iPadStandard CareTotal
Count of participants201939

3 further baseline measures are reported on the registry.

08

Study locations

1 site
  • Rady Children's Hospital San Diego
    San Diego, California 92123, United States
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Crellin D, Sullivan TP, Babl FE, O'Sullivan R, Hutchinson A. Analysis of the validation of existing behavioral pain and distress scales for use in the procedural setting. Paediatr Anaesth. 2007 Aug;17(8):720-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2007.02218.x. PubMed 17596217 ↗
  • Luhmann JD, Kennedy RM, Porter FL, Miller JP, Jaffe DM. A randomized clinical trial of continuous-flow nitrous oxide and midazolam for sedation of young children during laceration repair. Ann Emerg Med. 2001 Jan;37(1):20-7. doi: 10.1067/mem.2001.112003. PubMed 11145766 ↗
  • McQueen A, Cress C, Tothy A. Using a tablet computer during pediatric procedures: a case series and review of the "apps". Pediatr Emerg Care. 2012 Jul;28(7):712-4. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e31825d24eb. PubMed 22766593 ↗
  • Sinha M, Christopher NC, Fenn R, Reeves L. Evaluation of nonpharmacologic methods of pain and anxiety management for laceration repair in the pediatric emergency department. Pediatrics. 2006 Apr;117(4):1162-8. doi: 10.1542/peds.2005-1100. PubMed 16585311 ↗
  • Jay SM, Elliott C. Behavioral observation scales for measuring children's distress: the effects of increased methodological rigor. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1984 Dec;52(6):1106-7. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.52.6.1106. No abstract available. PubMed 6520283 ↗
  • Bryl AW, Bonsu B, Johnson AL, Pommert KBJ, Hollenbach KA, Kanegaye JT. Tablet Computer as a Distraction Tool During Facial Laceration Repair: A Randomized Trial. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2021 Aug 1;37(8):e425-e430. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000001626. PubMed 30422942 ↗
10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jul 23, 2019, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02217436
Lead sponsor
University of California, San Diego
Responsible party
Amy Williams (Co-Investigator, University of California, San Diego) — Principal investigator
First posted
Aug 15, 2014
Start date
Apr 2014
Primary completion
Jul 2015
Completion
Jul 2015
Results posted
Jul 23, 2019
Last update
Jul 23, 2019

Study contacts

Bema Bonsu, MD
principal investigator · University of California, San Diego and Rady Children's Hospital San Diego
Amy Williams, MD
principal investigator · University of California, San Diego and Rady Children's Hospital San Diego

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion