Skip to main content
. 2016 Jul 15;2016(7):CD001069. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001069.pub5

Stang 1997.

Methods Prospective, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial
Painful intervention: circumcision
Study location: Fairview Riverside Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
Study period: 1993 to 1994
Participants 80 healthy term male newborns, mean PMA 39.5 weeks, mean PNA 31.5 h
Interventions DPNB with non‐buffered lidocaine (0.8 mL lidocaine, 0.2 mL saline), new padded restraint chair and pacifier dipped in water (n = 20)
DPNB with buffered lidocaine (0.8 mL lidocaine, 0.2 mL sodium bicarbonate), rigid plastic restraint chair and pacifier dipped in water (n = 20)
DPNB with non‐buffered lidocaine (0.8 mL lidocaine, 0.2 mL saline), rigid plastic restraint chair and pacifier dipped in 24% sucrose (n = 20)
DPNB with non‐buffered lidocaine (0.8 mL lidocaine, 0.2 mL saline), rigid plastic restraint chair and pacifier dipped in water (n = 20)
Outcomes Behavioural Distress Scale (scores prior to injection, at injection for DPNB, 2 min post injection, 4 min post injection and at circumcision); plasma cortisol level (30 min after start of circumcision); percentage of sleep during circumcision
Notes Results were reported as mean and SDs
 ANOVA with repeated measures were used to compare distress scores. 1‐way ANOVAs were used to examine plasma cortisol and sleep data
Adverse effects were not evaluated
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Sequence generation not described
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Allocation concealment not described
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Sucrose and water solutions blinded
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Blinding of outcome assessments
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk Data results did not specify number of infants with data
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk The study protocol was not available to us so we could not judge whether there were any deviations from it
Other bias Low risk Appears free of other bias