This Article  • Full text  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on ISI (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1998;152:931.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Is the report published by Herschel et al¹ regarding the use of a sucrose pacifier for pain control an attempt to attenuate the collective guilt we as a profession have for introducing and perpetuating routine male genital alteration in the United States? While the optimistic spin on the published results is that a sucrose pacifier or a dorsal penile nerve block reduces the heart rate increases associated with neonatal circumcision, a more realistic take is that notable increases in heart rate are not avoided with either modality. All published studies of topical and local anesthetic use for neonatal circumcision have documented notable increases in the pain parameters. This suggests that these modalities, although better than no anesthetic, do not provide complete anesthesia. Although neonates have a lower pain threshold,² these modalities are considered inadequate for the same procedure in older children and adults.³ Do we employ anesthetics that are inadequate . . . [Full Text of this Article]