A randomized controlled trial compared circumferential block to hematoma block for pain management during distal radius fracture reduction in 51 patients. The primary outcome was pain measured by Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Circumferential block showed statistically significant lower pain scores at 5 minutes post-injection (1.19 vs. 3.08, p < 0.01), during reduction (1.61 vs. 4.96, p < 0.01), and at 10 minutes post-reduction (1.50 vs. 4.12, p < 0.01). Radiographic alignment was similar between groups, though specific measurements were not reported.
No adverse events such as neurovascular injury or infection were reported in either group. Information on serious adverse events, discontinuations, and tolerability was not provided. The study did not report follow-up duration, study phase, or funding sources.
Key limitations include the small sample size of 51 patients and the absence of long-term functional outcome assessments. The study setting was not specified, and absolute numbers for pain scores were not reported, limiting precision. While the RCT design supports causal inference for acute pain control, the findings require confirmation in larger populations.
For practice, circumferential block may offer an alternative for acute procedural pain management in distal radius fracture reduction, with similar safety and alignment outcomes to hematoma block in this small trial. Clinicians should consider these results preliminary and await larger studies with functional endpoints before definitive practice changes.
View Original Abstract ↓
BACKGROUND: Distal radius fractures are among the most common orthopedic injuries requiring effective pain management during closed reduction. While the hematoma block is widely used, circumferential block has been proposed as an alternative due to its broader analgesic coverage. However, direct comparative evidence remains limited.
METHODS: This double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) included 51 patients with distal radius fractures treated from June 2023 to May 2024. Patients were randomized into hematoma block or circumferential block groups. Pain levels were measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at four time points: before injection, 5 min post-injection, during reduction, and 10 min post-reduction. Radiographic alignment and complications were also assessed.
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups (p = 0.42). Pain scores were significantly lower in the circumferential block group across all post-injection time points (p < 0.01). VAS scores: Circumferential block provided better pain relief at 5 min post-injection (1.19 vs. 3.08), during reduction (1.61 vs. 4.96), and 10 min post-reduction (1.50 vs. 4.12). Radiographic alignment outcomes were similar between groups. No adverse events (e.g., neurovascular injury, infection) were reported.
CONCLUSIONS: Circumferential block demonstrated superior pain control compared to hematoma block without compromising fracture alignment or increasing complications. Its broader periosteal innervation coverage and ease of administration suggest it may be a valuable alternative for pain management in distal radius fracture reduction. However, further studies with larger sample sizes and long-term functional assessments are warranted to confirm these findings.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .