IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/clnure/v31y2022i5p812-819.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effectiveness of Two Different Methods on the Perceived Pain and Satisfaction During Intramuscular Antibiotic Injection: ShotBlocker and Local Vibration

Author

Listed:
  • Cemile Savcı
  • Burcu Özkan
  • KurtuluÅŸ Açıksarı
  • Görkem Alper SolakoÄŸlu

Abstract

In this study aimed to examine the effectiveness of ShotBlocker and local vibration on the perceived pain and satisfaction during intramuscular antibiotic injection. The sample of the randomized controlled experimental study consisted of 100 patients (32 in vibration group, 35 in ShotBlocker group, 33 in control group) who applied to the adult emergency clinic for antibiotic (amoxicillin/cefuroxime sodium) injection between April and May 2021. The study data were collected using the Structured Information Form, VAS for Pain and VAS for Satisfaction. CONSORT statement was followed for reporting. After the intramuscular antibiotic injection, a significant difference was found between the groups in terms of the mean scores of VAS for Pain and VAS for Injection Satisfaction ( p  

Suggested Citation

  • Cemile Savcı & Burcu Özkan & KurtuluÅŸ Açıksarı & Görkem Alper SolakoÄŸlu, 2022. "Effectiveness of Two Different Methods on the Perceived Pain and Satisfaction During Intramuscular Antibiotic Injection: ShotBlocker and Local Vibration," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 31(5), pages 812-819, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:31:y:2022:i:5:p:812-819
    DOI: 10.1177/10547738211051877
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10547738211051877
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/10547738211051877?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:31:y:2022:i:5:p:812-819. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.