Movement discrimination after intra-articular local anaesthetic of the ankle joint

Stuart Down, Gordon Waddington, Roger Adams, Malcolm Thomson

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    10 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Background: The effect on clinical safety of dampening articular mechanoreceptor feedback at the ankle is unknown. Injection of the ankle joint for pain control may result in such dampening. Athletes receiving intra-articular local anaesthetic may therefore be at increased risk of sustaining ankle injuries, which are a common reason for missed sporting participation. Objective: To determine the effect of intra-articular local anaesthetic on movement discrimination at the ankle joint. Design: Prospective, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial.
    Setting: Australian Institute of Sport Medical Centre, Canberra, Australia. Patients: Twenty two healthy subjects (44 ankles) aged 18–26 were recruited for the three visits of the study. Interventions: Subjects were tested for their initial movement discrimination scores using the active movement extent discrimination apparatus (AMEDA). They then received ultrasound-guided intra-articular injections of local anaesthetic (2% lignocaine hydrochloride) or normal saline, on two separate later occasions, before further AMEDA assessment. Main outcome measures: Change in movement discrimination scores after intra-articular injection of local anaesthetic or saline. Results: Movement discrimination scores were not significantly different from control ankles after injection of either local anaesthetic or saline into the ankle joint. Conclusions: The intra-articular injection of neither 2 ml lignocaine nor an equivalent amount of normal saline resulted in significant effects on movement discrimination at the ankle joint. These results suggest that injections of local anaesthetic into the ankle joint are unlikely to significantly affect proprioception and thereby increase injury risk
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)501-505
    Number of pages5
    JournalBritish Journal of Sports Medicine
    Volume41
    Issue number8
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2007

    Fingerprint

    Ankle Joint
    Local Anesthetics
    Joints
    Intra-Articular Injections
    Ankle
    Lidocaine
    Injections
    Ankle Injuries
    Proprioception
    Mechanoreceptors
    Arthralgia
    Athletes
    Cross-Over Studies
    Sports
    Healthy Volunteers
    Placebos
    Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
    Safety
    Wounds and Injuries

    Cite this

    Down, Stuart ; Waddington, Gordon ; Adams, Roger ; Thomson, Malcolm. / Movement discrimination after intra-articular local anaesthetic of the ankle joint. In: British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2007 ; Vol. 41, No. 8. pp. 501-505.
    @article{c4ed2d2156c64bdd9e1aa2755bfad0f7,
    title = "Movement discrimination after intra-articular local anaesthetic of the ankle joint",
    abstract = "Background: The effect on clinical safety of dampening articular mechanoreceptor feedback at the ankle is unknown. Injection of the ankle joint for pain control may result in such dampening. Athletes receiving intra-articular local anaesthetic may therefore be at increased risk of sustaining ankle injuries, which are a common reason for missed sporting participation. Objective: To determine the effect of intra-articular local anaesthetic on movement discrimination at the ankle joint. Design: Prospective, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial.Setting: Australian Institute of Sport Medical Centre, Canberra, Australia. Patients: Twenty two healthy subjects (44 ankles) aged 18–26 were recruited for the three visits of the study. Interventions: Subjects were tested for their initial movement discrimination scores using the active movement extent discrimination apparatus (AMEDA). They then received ultrasound-guided intra-articular injections of local anaesthetic (2{\%} lignocaine hydrochloride) or normal saline, on two separate later occasions, before further AMEDA assessment. Main outcome measures: Change in movement discrimination scores after intra-articular injection of local anaesthetic or saline. Results: Movement discrimination scores were not significantly different from control ankles after injection of either local anaesthetic or saline into the ankle joint. Conclusions: The intra-articular injection of neither 2 ml lignocaine nor an equivalent amount of normal saline resulted in significant effects on movement discrimination at the ankle joint. These results suggest that injections of local anaesthetic into the ankle joint are unlikely to significantly affect proprioception and thereby increase injury risk",
    author = "Stuart Down and Gordon Waddington and Roger Adams and Malcolm Thomson",
    year = "2007",
    doi = "10.1136/bjsm.2006.031468",
    language = "English",
    volume = "41",
    pages = "501--505",
    journal = "British Journal of Sports Medicine",
    issn = "0306-3674",
    publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
    number = "8",

    }

    Movement discrimination after intra-articular local anaesthetic of the ankle joint. / Down, Stuart; Waddington, Gordon; Adams, Roger; Thomson, Malcolm.

    In: British Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 41, No. 8, 2007, p. 501-505.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Movement discrimination after intra-articular local anaesthetic of the ankle joint

    AU - Down, Stuart

    AU - Waddington, Gordon

    AU - Adams, Roger

    AU - Thomson, Malcolm

    PY - 2007

    Y1 - 2007

    N2 - Background: The effect on clinical safety of dampening articular mechanoreceptor feedback at the ankle is unknown. Injection of the ankle joint for pain control may result in such dampening. Athletes receiving intra-articular local anaesthetic may therefore be at increased risk of sustaining ankle injuries, which are a common reason for missed sporting participation. Objective: To determine the effect of intra-articular local anaesthetic on movement discrimination at the ankle joint. Design: Prospective, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial.Setting: Australian Institute of Sport Medical Centre, Canberra, Australia. Patients: Twenty two healthy subjects (44 ankles) aged 18–26 were recruited for the three visits of the study. Interventions: Subjects were tested for their initial movement discrimination scores using the active movement extent discrimination apparatus (AMEDA). They then received ultrasound-guided intra-articular injections of local anaesthetic (2% lignocaine hydrochloride) or normal saline, on two separate later occasions, before further AMEDA assessment. Main outcome measures: Change in movement discrimination scores after intra-articular injection of local anaesthetic or saline. Results: Movement discrimination scores were not significantly different from control ankles after injection of either local anaesthetic or saline into the ankle joint. Conclusions: The intra-articular injection of neither 2 ml lignocaine nor an equivalent amount of normal saline resulted in significant effects on movement discrimination at the ankle joint. These results suggest that injections of local anaesthetic into the ankle joint are unlikely to significantly affect proprioception and thereby increase injury risk

    AB - Background: The effect on clinical safety of dampening articular mechanoreceptor feedback at the ankle is unknown. Injection of the ankle joint for pain control may result in such dampening. Athletes receiving intra-articular local anaesthetic may therefore be at increased risk of sustaining ankle injuries, which are a common reason for missed sporting participation. Objective: To determine the effect of intra-articular local anaesthetic on movement discrimination at the ankle joint. Design: Prospective, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial.Setting: Australian Institute of Sport Medical Centre, Canberra, Australia. Patients: Twenty two healthy subjects (44 ankles) aged 18–26 were recruited for the three visits of the study. Interventions: Subjects were tested for their initial movement discrimination scores using the active movement extent discrimination apparatus (AMEDA). They then received ultrasound-guided intra-articular injections of local anaesthetic (2% lignocaine hydrochloride) or normal saline, on two separate later occasions, before further AMEDA assessment. Main outcome measures: Change in movement discrimination scores after intra-articular injection of local anaesthetic or saline. Results: Movement discrimination scores were not significantly different from control ankles after injection of either local anaesthetic or saline into the ankle joint. Conclusions: The intra-articular injection of neither 2 ml lignocaine nor an equivalent amount of normal saline resulted in significant effects on movement discrimination at the ankle joint. These results suggest that injections of local anaesthetic into the ankle joint are unlikely to significantly affect proprioception and thereby increase injury risk

    U2 - 10.1136/bjsm.2006.031468

    DO - 10.1136/bjsm.2006.031468

    M3 - Article

    VL - 41

    SP - 501

    EP - 505

    JO - British Journal of Sports Medicine

    JF - British Journal of Sports Medicine

    SN - 0306-3674

    IS - 8

    ER -