BUZZY Research & Clinical Trials

If you'd like to learn more about Buzzy including research and clinical trials, please visit the Home of Buzzy.

 

Moadad N, Kozman K, et al. Distraction Using the BUZZY for Children During an IV Insertion.  J Pediatr Nurs. 2015 Sep 22.
In this randomized control trial (RCT), children between the ages of 4 to 12years were assigned to either an intervention or a control group. The intervention group (n=25) had the "BUZZY" applied during IV insertion while the control group (n=23) did not have the "BUZZY". Pain scores were significantly lower in the "BUZZY" group for children and the nurses. Time to a successful IV insertion did not differ between groups. Gender, age, previous hospitalization, diagnoses and analgesics were all factors associated with the children's pain scores. However, a multiple regression analysis found that only the "BUZZY" remained a significant predictor of pain scores in children.

Kearl YL, Yanger S, Montero S, Morelos-Howard E, Claudius I.  Does Combined Use of the J-tip and Buzzy Device Decrease the Pain of Venipuncture in a Pediatric Population? J Pediatr Nurs.  2015 July 27
In patients 1 month to 21 years, with the J-tip® alone (phase 1), 21% had a pain scale score >3 with venipuncture and 22.3% had a pain scale score >3 with application of the J-tip® itself. With Buzzy + Jtip, (phase 2), 14.2% of patients had a pain scale score >3 with venipuncture and 16.1% had a pain scale score >3 with application of the J-tip® itself. However, the pain reductions with Buzzy did not reach statistical significance.

Bahorski J, Hauber RP et al.  Mitigating procedural pain during venipuncture in a pediatric population. Int J Nurs Stud. 2015 Jun 10. (15)00191-1 
Children 18 months to 17 years requiring veni-puncture were randomized to Buzzy vibration only, LMX4, or both.  A 3x4 factorial design was used, evaluating age, ethnicity, sex, and intervention.  For the 173 children participating, CHEOPS and WBFPS ratings of pain relief did not significantly differ between Buzzy and LMX.  For Caucasian children, the combination of Buzzy AND LMX provided improved pain relief compared to either group (p=.006) No difference by age or gender was noted. Per the authors, “mechanical vibration [Buzzy] appears to be as effective as a topical anesthetic in children regardless of age, ethnic group, or sex. It has the advantage of being a fast-acting, cost effective, non-pharmacological preparatory intervention for venipuncture in children.”

Canbulat N, Ayhan F, Inal S.  Effectiveness of External Cold and Vibration for Procedural Pain Relief During Peripheral Intravenous Cannulation in Pediatric Patients.  Pain Management Nursing, 2015 Feb;16(1):33-9.
The authors describe 176 patients aged 7 to 12 years who were randomized to either a control group that received no cannulation intervention and the experimental group that received external cold and vibration via Buzzy.  The same nurse conducted the peripheral IV cannulation in all children.  Cold and vibration were applied 1 minute before the peripheral IV and continued until the end of the procedure.  Pre-procedural anxiety did not differ.  Comparison of the two groups showed 52-60% pain reduction (p<.001) and significantly lower anxiety levels in the experimental group than in the control group during the peripheral IV cannulation.  “Buzzy can be considered to provide an effective combination of cold and vibration that can be used during pediatric peripheral IV cannulation by pediatric nurses.”

Whelan HM, Kunselman AR et al.  The Impact of a Locally Applied Vibrating Device on Outpatient Venipuncture in Children.  Clin Pediatr 2014 Oct;53(12):1189-95. 
As part of a quality improvement project, patients and phlebotomists were surveyed prior to initiation of implementation of the vibrating device Buzzy.  Prior to the device, 17 of 29 children (59%) indicated they wished something had been used to decrease venipuncture pain.  80% of those using the vibrating device (n=35) indicated that they would like it used for future procedures.  Children with previous venipuncture experiences appeared to benefit most.  81% of phlebotomists reported the vibration made the procedure easier; none reported it complicated the procedure.  The study concluded that locally applied vibration appears to be a well-accepted technique to minimize discomfort that may facilitate the procedure.

Russell R. Nicholson, L. Legge, E. Leauanae, A. Olsen, S. Marsh. R. Naidu. Reducing the pain of Bicillin injections in the Rheumatic Fever population of CMDHB. Counties Manukau District Health Board.  J Pediatr Child Health October 18 2013. Pain from 5.36 ->2.44, 54% reduction in injection pain. N=199 p<.001 pain, p=.007 fear reduction.

Inal S, Kelleci M. Buzzy relieves pediatric venipuncture pain during blood specimen collection. MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs 2012 Sep;37(5):339-45.Buzzy alone no distraction: 6.56 -> 2.78, 58% reduction in pain. Fear 52% reduction. N=120 p<.001

Baxter AL, Cohen LL, Von Baeyer C. An Integration of Vibration and Cold Relieves Venipuncture Pain in a Pediatric Emergency Department. Pediatr Emerg Care, 2011 Dec;27(12): 1151-6. Pain reduced by child, parent, and nurse reports median 4 to median 2 = 50%. N=87 p=.005 – p=.036 Improved IV success OR 3.05 (1.03-9.02)

Baxter AL, Leong T, Mathew B. External thermomechanical stimulation versus vapocoolant for adult venipuncture pain : Pilot data on a novel device. Clin J Pain, 2009 October ;25(8):705-10. This was a crossover pilot study of 16 adult patients using Buzzy or nothing and 14 patients using vapocoolant spray or nothing. The Buzzy device prototype significantly reduced pain (p=.035) while vapocoolant spray did not. Those with greater needle anxiety were more likely to experience pain relief with Buzzy: each 20 mm of prior anxiety increased the likelihood of intervention pain relief (odds ratio 2, P=0.043).