Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 28, 2026

Guidelines for Elective Pediatric Fiberoptic Intubation
Published on: January 17, 2011
A comparison of buffered lidocaine versus ELA-Max before peripheral intravenous catheter insertions in children
Janet Luhmann1, Sarah Hurt, Mario Shootman
1Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, St Louis Children's Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri 63110-1077, USA. luhmann_j@kids.wustl.edu
Insights
Topical ELA-Max and injected buffered lidocaine equally reduce pain and anxiety during pediatric peripheral intravenous catheter (PIV) insertion. Both methods showed similar effectiveness and nurse satisfaction.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Emergency Medicine
- Pain Management
- Anesthesiology
Background:
- Peripheral intravenous catheter (PIV) insertion is a common, painful procedure for children.
- Injected buffered lidocaine is effective but not routinely used.
- Topical ELA-Max offers needle-free pain relief but lacks comparative data for PIV insertion.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy of subcutaneous buffered 1% lidocaine versus topical ELA-Max in reducing pain and anxiety during PIV insertion in children.
Main Methods:
- A randomized trial involving children aged 4-17 undergoing PIV insertion.
- Participants received either buffered lidocaine injection or topical ELA-Max application.
- Pain and anxiety were assessed using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) questionnaires by patients, parents, and blinded observers.
Main Results:
- No significant differences were found in pain or anxiety reduction between buffered lidocaine and ELA-Max groups.
- Patient demographics and baseline pain/anxiety levels were similar between groups.
- Nurse-reported technical difficulty and satisfaction with local anesthesia were also comparable.
Conclusions:
- Topical ELA-Max provides comparable pain and anxiety reduction to injected buffered lidocaine for pediatric PIV insertion.
- Both anesthetic methods demonstrated similar outcomes regarding procedural ease and nurse satisfaction.
Background:
Peripheral intravenous catheter (PIV) insertion is a common, painful experience for many children in the pediatric emergency department. Although local anesthetics such as injected buffered lidocaine have been shown to be effective at reducing pain and anxiety associated with PIV insertion, they are not routinely used. ELA-Max, a topical local anesthetic, has the advantage of needle-free administration but has not been compared with buffered lidocaine for PIV insertion.
Objective:
To compare the reduction of pain and anxiety during PIV insertion provided by subcutaneous buffered 1% lidocaine or topical ELA-Max in children.
Methods:
A randomized trial in children 4 to 17 years old undergoing PIV insertion with 22-gauge catheters was conducted. Children received either buffered lidocaine or ELA-Max. Buffered lidocaine was administered by using 30-gauge needles to inject 0.1 to 0.2 mL subcutaneously just before PIV insertion. ELA-Max was applied to the skin and occluded with Tegaderm 30 minutes before PIV insertion. Self-reported Visual Analog Scale (VAS) questionnaires (rating on a scale of 1-10; 1 = no pain, anxiety) were completed by patients and their parents before PIV insertion to assess baseline perceptions about pain and anxiety associated with PIV insertion and immediately after PIV insertion to assess pain and anxiety associated with the experience. After PIV insertion, the nurse who inserted the PIV also completed a VAS questionnaire assessing technical difficulty and satisfaction with the local anesthesia. A blinded observer also completed a VAS questionnaire to assess pain and anxiety associated with the PIV insertion. Data were analyzed by using chi2 and t tests.
Results:
Sixty-nine subjects were enrolled, and questionnaires were competed by all (mean age: 12.1 +/- 4.5 years; 61% female). There were no differences for buffered lidocaine and ELA-Max groups in age, gender, race, prior IV experience, or baseline pain and anxiety. There were no significant differences between buffered lidocaine and ELA-Max in mean pain and anxiety after PIV insertion by patient, parent, and blinded observer ratings. Nurse ratings of technical difficulty, number of PIV-insertion attempts, and satisfaction with local anesthesia also were not significantly different for buffered lidocaine and ELA-Max groups.
Conclusions:
ELA-Max provided similar pain and anxiety reduction during PIV insertion in children compared with injected buffered lidocaine. Technical difficulty and satisfaction by nurses inserting the PIV also were similar.
Related Concept Videos
Local Anesthetics: Pharmacokinetics
Local Anesthetics: Common Agents and Their Applications
Cocaine is an ester of benzoic acid and methylecgogine. It is used to anesthetize and vasoconstrict locally. Currently, it is used primarily for topical applications. It is beneficial for surgeries on the upper respiratory tract, providing anesthesia and shrinking the mucosa. Cocaine in the form of cocaine hydrochloride is...
Local Anesthetics: Clinical Application as Surface, Infiltration, and Conduction Block Anesthesia
Local Anesthetics: Clinical Application as Spinal Anesthesia
Local Anesthetics: Clinical Application as Epidural Anesthesia
Since epidural anesthetics can be infused through an epidural catheter, all types of drugs, including short-acting ones, can be administered. Chloroprocaine and lidocaine are examples of short and long-duration anesthetics, respectively. Bupivacaine...
Local Anesthetics: Clinical Application as Intravenous Regional Anesthesia
One of the advantages of...

