There have been a few studies done on EMLA...and while not as effective as a dorsal block... it still helps:http://parenting.ivillage.com/newbor...,,3q4z,00.html
It's also recommended by the AAFPhttp://www.aafp.org/afp/2004/0215/p909.html
Your link is from the UK, not the U.S.
In the US patient-insert from Astra-Zeneca, there is nothing about it not being recommended for circumcision.http://www1.astrazeneca-us.com/pi/EMLA.pdf
They mention a study of 105 infants...using it for blood drawing and circumcision. They also mention 2 cases of blistering from application under adverse reactions.
I wonder if the issue is that your link is from the UK, where RIC is uncommon?
In this UK AstraZeneca P.I., they also do not say anything about not using EMLA. To the contrary, they mention studies where it was effective.http://emc.medicines.org.uk/document...documentId=171
|In two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in full-term neonates aged 1 to 4 days EMLA Cream (0.5 or 1 g) was applied on the prepuce for one hour before circumcision, covered with an occlusive dressing...
EMLA significantly reduced the pain during parts of the circumcision procedure, as demonstrated by less facial activity, reduction in duration of cry and lower heart rates. No differences were found for oxygen saturation, respiratory rate and Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS) – which includes facial expression, cry, breathing pattern and state of arousal
If one isn't supposed to use it on the genitals of infants, then I find it strange that it is recommended by AAFP...and that in both the US and UK inserts, they cite studies showing that it is effective in circumcision.