Next Article in Journal
Ionic Channels as Targets for Drug Design: A Review on Computational Methods
Next Article in Special Issue
Tissue Engineered Human Skin Equivalents
Previous Article in Journal / Special Issue
Formulation Patents and Dermatology and Obviousness
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Pharmaceutics 2011, 3(4), 923-931; doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics3040923

Effect of Duration and Amplitude of Direct Current when Lidocaine Is Delivered by Iontophoresis

1
University of Virginia, PO Box 400407, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA
2
Ortho Rehab & Specialty Centers, 3808 Rose Point Cove, PO Box 241574, Little Rock, AR 72223, USA
3
University of Kentucky, 900 South Limestone Street, Lexington, KY 40536, USA
4
Central Michigan University, 2217 Health Professions Building, Mt. Pleasant, MI 48859, USA
5
University of Virginia, PO Box 400834, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 8 October 2011 / Revised: 25 November 2011 / Accepted: 5 December 2011 / Published: 6 December 2011
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Transdermal Drug Delivery)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [199 KB, 8 December 2011; original version 6 December 2011]   |  

Abstract

Dosage for the galvanic stimulation for iontophoresis varies. Clinicians manipulate the duration or the amplitude of the current, but it is not known which is more effective. We compared the anesthetic effect of lidocaine HCL (2%) by manipulating the current parameters on 21 healthy volunteers (age: 21.2 ± 4.2, height 170.7 ± 10.2 cm, mass 82.1 ± 19.2 kg). Three conditions were administered in a random order using a Phoresor II® with 2 mL, 2% lidocaine HCL in an iontophoresis electrode. (1) HASD (40 mA*min): High amplitude (4 mA), short duration (10 min); (2) LALD (40 mA.min): Low amplitude (2 mA), long duration (20 min); (3) Sham condition (0 mA, 20 min). Semmes-Weinstein monofilament (SWM) scores were taken pre and post intervention to measure sensation changes. Two-way ANOVA with repeated measures was used to compare sensation. Both iontophoresis treatments: LALD (4.2 ± 0.32 mm) and HASD (4.2 ± 0.52 mm) significantly increased SWM scores, indicating an increase in anesthesia, compared to the sham condition (3.6 ± 0.06 mm) p < 0.05. Neither LALD nor HASD was more effective and there was no difference in anesthesia with the sham. Lidocaine delivered via iontophoresis reduces cutaneous sensation. However, there was no benefit in either a HASD or LALD treatment.
Keywords: percutaneous drug delivery; physical therapy; transdermal; electrical stimulation; electroporation percutaneous drug delivery; physical therapy; transdermal; electrical stimulation; electroporation
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 3.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Saliba, S.A.; Teeter-Heyl, C.L.; McKeon, P.; Ingeroll, C.D.; Saliba, E.N. Effect of Duration and Amplitude of Direct Current when Lidocaine Is Delivered by Iontophoresis. Pharmaceutics 2011, 3, 923-931.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Pharmaceutics EISSN 1999-4923 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top