Assessment of a novel blinding device for nerve catheter studies: a randomised ex vivo study

Adam Badenoch, Baha'a Hijazi, Vanessa Scotland, Louise de Prinse, Leah Moffat, Thomas Smith, Hayden Frances, Andrew Baker, Claire Schwerdtfeger, Mason Crossman, Jarryd Herd, Krystal Lee, Sam Paull, Elise Kingston, Murthy Mittinty

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterpeer-review


Unblinded studies overestimate treatment effects compared with blinded studies. Therefore, blinding participants and outcome assessors is an important aspect of study design to minimise potential bias. Blinding is particularly important for studies involving subjective outcomes such as pain, satisfaction, or quality of recovery, which are commonly assessed outcomes in studies investigating the efficacy of regional anaesthesia techniques. However, blinding is particularly difficult to achieve in procedure-related research when compared with pharmaceutical research. Despite its importance as a scientific principle, the success or failure of blinding is frequently not assessed. Furthermore, when it is assessed, it has been consistently demonstrated that blinding is often not achieved in practice.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)184-186
Number of pages3
JournalBritish Journal of Anaesthesia
Issue number1
Early online date1 Nov 2023
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2024


  • double-blind
  • nerve block
  • placebo effect
  • regional anaesthesia
  • sham treatment


Dive into the research topics of 'Assessment of a novel blinding device for nerve catheter studies: a randomised ex vivo study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this