McCulloch 1985.

Methods	Randomized controlled trial
Participants	Age (years, mean (range)): Group A = 35 (19 to 54), Group B = 37 (19 to 65), Group C = 35 (16 to 65), Group D = 32 (18 to 65) Gender (M:F): Group A = 6:34, Group B = 5:35, Group C = 9:31, Group D = 1:39 Inclusion criteria: age 16 years to 65 years old, ASA I‐II, minor elective surgery Exclusion criteria: pregnancy, weight more than 10% above expected body weight Recruitment: 160 adult patients randomly assigned (40 in each group) Setting: United Kingdom
Interventions	Pretreatment alone Group A (n = 40): IV at dorsum of hand, propofol 2.5 mg/kg Group B (n = 40): IV at forearm/antecubital fossa, propofol 2.5 mg/kg Group C (n = 40): IV at dorsum of hand, lidocaine 10 mg pretreated followed by propofol 2.5 mg/kg Group D (n = 40): IV at dorsum of hand, thiopental 4.5mg/kg (without propofol)
Outcomes	Pain was assessed on 3‐point scale 0 = no pain 1 = other sensations e.g.. tingling, numbness, cold and warmth 2 = pain Outcomes reported and used Incidence of pain Adverse effects Outcomes sought but not reported Incidence of high‐intensity pain Patient satisfaction
Notes	Period of the study: dates not reported
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	N/A
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	N/A
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	"The position of IV in group B were different. The appearance of thiopental and propofol were also different. However, only the result of group A and group C were analyzed, where the position of venous access and the appearance of drug solution were similar."
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	N/A
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No withdrawals
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	N/A
Other bias	High risk	The authors would like to thank I.C.I. pharmaceuticals for supplying propofol