CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03623035Updated Oct 23, 2019Results posted

Pain and Sensation After Regional Anesthesia - Pilot Study

An observational study in Anesthesia, Conduction and Osteoarthritis, Hip, sponsored by Wake Forest University Health Sciences. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-10-23.

Sponsored by Wake Forest University Health Sciences · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
10
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study aims to determine spinal resolution and pain levels after the placement of a lumbar plexus block (LPB) and spinal for total hip replacement procedure. This is a pilot study that looks to collect information in order to design a larger, more significant study comparing Quadratus Lumborum blocks (QLB) and Lumbar Plexus blocks.

Read the detailed description

The Quadratus Lumborum block (QLB) is a newer regional analgesic technique that may be as effective as Lumbar Plexus blocks (LPB) at providing pain control following direct anterior approach (DAA) hip arthroplasty. The purpose of this study is to collect pilot data to help the design of a future randomized study, comparing a QLB to a LPB for DAA procedures. The investigators will assess for spinal resolution below the level of L5/S1 by assessing the presence of pin prick sensation at these levels. This will help determine if pain scores collected at 6hrs reflect analgesia provided by the preoperative LPB alone or if the data is confounded by the presence of spinal anesthesia. This data will help us determine if 6hrs is a feasible primary endpoint to assess pain scores. Additionally, assuming that spinal regression is complete by 6hrs, the VAS pain scores obtained will then be used to perform a power analysis to determine the necessary study size when comparing QLB to LPB for DAA hip arthroplasty.

02

Conditions studied

  • Anesthesia, Conduction
  • Osteoarthritis, Hip

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Lumbar Plexus block
  • total hip arthroplasty
  • Arthroplasty, direct anterior approach
  • Pain
03

In context

Osteoarthritis, Hip

628 studies on the registry are indexed under Osteoarthritis, Hip; 121 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 10 is below the median of 141 across 154 observational studies indexed under Osteoarthritis, Hip.

Browse Osteoarthritis, Hip studies →

Lead sponsor

Wake Forest University Health Sciences is the lead sponsor of 1,320 studies on the registry; 199 are open to participants now.

Of its 323 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 243 (75%) have results posted.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Patients with Total Hip Arthroplasty surgeries at Davie Medical Center of Wake Forest Baptist Health.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients that have elective total hip arthroplasty with DAA at Davie Medical Center.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients will be excluded if they do not receive a lumbar plexus block and spinal anesthesia.
  • and/or if they have peripheral neuropathy affecting their feet.
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
10 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Lumbar Plexus block Group

    This group includes participants that received Lumbar Plexus blocks (LPB) as the regional analgesic technique in a direct anterior approach (DAA) Total Hip Arthroplasty.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Patient Pain Score With Activity

    Pain scores will be measured on a verbal pain score when participant sits up in bed. Totals Score range 0-10. Lower scores denote better outcomes.

    Time frame: 6 Hours post block placement

Secondary outcomes

  1. Patient Pain Scores at Rest

    Pain scores will be measured, when the patient is laying still in bed, on a verbal pain scale. Totals Score range 0-10. Lower scores denote better outcomes.

    Time frame: 6 Hours post block placement

  2. Number of Participants Reporting Pin Prick Sensation

    Assessment for spinal resolution below the level of L5/S1 by assessing the presence of pin prick sensation at these levels.

    Time frame: 6 Hours post block placement

07

Results

Posted Jun 5, 2019

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneLumbar Plexus Block Group
Started10
Completed10
Not completed0

Outcome measures

PrimaryPatient Pain Score With Activity

Pain scores will be measured on a verbal pain score when participant sits up in bed. Totals Score range 0-10. Lower scores denote better outcomes.

Time frame:
6 Hours post block placement
Reported as:
Mean · units on a scale
Patient Pain Score With Activity
units on a scaleLumbar Plexus Block Group
Patient Pain Score With Activity1.4 ± 1.5
SecondaryPatient Pain Scores at Rest

Pain scores will be measured, when the patient is laying still in bed, on a verbal pain scale. Totals Score range 0-10. Lower scores denote better outcomes.

Time frame:
6 Hours post block placement
Reported as:
Mean · units on a scale
Patient Pain Scores at Rest
units on a scaleLumbar Plexus Block Group
Patient Pain Scores at Rest1 ± 1.1
SecondaryNumber of Participants Reporting Pin Prick Sensation

Assessment for spinal resolution below the level of L5/S1 by assessing the presence of pin prick sensation at these levels.

Time frame:
6 Hours post block placement
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants Reporting Pin Prick Sensation
ParticipantsLumbar Plexus Block Group
Number of Participants Reporting Pin Prick Sensation9

Adverse events

Collected over Adverse event data were collected for 30 days after the day of surgery for each patient.. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Lumbar Plexus Block Group0/10 (0%)0/10 (0%)0/10 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

Age, Categorical
Age, Categorical(Participants)Lumbar Plexus Block Group
<=18 years0
Between 18 and 65 years7
>=65 years3
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Lumbar Plexus Block Group
Female9
Male1
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected(Participants)Lumbar Plexus Block Group
08

Study locations

1 site
  • Davie Medical Center
    Bermuda Run, North Carolina 27006, United States
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Laupacis A, Bourne R, Rorabeck C, Feeny D, Wong C, Tugwell P, Leslie K, Bullas R. The effect of elective total hip replacement on health-related quality of life. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993 Nov;75(11):1619-26. doi: 10.2106/00004623-199311000-00006. PubMed 8245054 ↗
  • Zhao HY, Kang PD, Xia YY, Shi XJ, Nie Y, Pei FX. Comparison of Early Functional Recovery After Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a Direct Anterior or Posterolateral Approach: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Arthroplasty. 2017 Nov;32(11):3421-3428. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.05.056. Epub 2017 Jun 8. PubMed 28662957 ↗
  • Capdevila X, Macaire P, Dadure C, Choquet O, Biboulet P, Ryckwaert Y, D'Athis F. Continuous psoas compartment block for postoperative analgesia after total hip arthroplasty: new landmarks, technical guidelines, and clinical evaluation. Anesth Analg. 2002 Jun;94(6):1606-13, table of contents. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200206000-00045. PubMed 12032037 ↗
  • Post ZD, Orozco F, Diaz-Ledezma C, Hozack WJ, Ong A. Direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty: indications, technique, and results. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2014 Sep;22(9):595-603. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-22-09-595. PubMed 25157041 ↗
  • Williams BA, Kentor ML, Vogt MT, Vogt WB, Coley KC, Williams JP, Roberts MS, Chelly JE, Harner CD, Fu FH. Economics of nerve block pain management after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: potential hospital cost savings via associated postanesthesia care unit bypass and same-day discharge. Anesthesiology. 2004 Mar;100(3):697-706. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200403000-00034. PubMed 15108988 ↗

Study documents

  • Study protocol · Jul 30, 2018

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Oct 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
NCT03623035
Lead sponsor
Wake Forest University Health Sciences
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Aug 9, 2018
Start date
Aug 16, 2018
Primary completion
Sep 10, 2018
Completion
Sep 10, 2018
Results posted
Jun 5, 2019
Last update
Oct 23, 2019

Study contacts

Christopher J Edwards, MD
principal investigator · Wake Forest University Health Sciences

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Feb 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