A total of 14-18 healthy volunteers will be included. There will be three different procedure days, separated by at least one week. On each visit, the subjects will receive a QL block, according to the randomization process. Each volunteer will undergo pre-procedure screening on the first visit. The blocks will be performed on the same side, by the same anesthesiologist, with at least one week between each block. An anterior QL block will be administered on one day, a posterior QL block on another, and a lateral QL block on the third. The order will be randomized, and both the subject and the research team member assessing the block will be blinded. To compare the dermatomal sensory block distribution, the investigators will use detailed mapping with pinprick, cold, and heat stimuli. A handheld dynamometric assessment of lower extremity strength. The testing will be performed 60 to 90 minutes after performance of the blocks.

Regional anesthesia techniques are widely employed to achieve sensory blockade of the abdominal wall. Among these, the epidural remains the most well-established approach, offering bilateral spread. However, its association with neuraxial complications has led to a decline in its clinical use. In contrast, fascial plane blocks, avoid neuraxial-related risks. The advent of ultrasound-guided blocks has sparked growing interest in novel fascial plane blocks, that can deliver multi-dermatomal with a lower rate of complications.

Three Quadratus Lumborum (QL) blocks are an example of these fascial plane blocks, commonly performed for abdominal and pelvic surgery. Despite their widespread clinical use, no prior studies have directly compared the three techniques in terms of their cutaneous distribution. Additionally, case reports note that lower extremity weakness can sometimes temporarily occur as a result of accidental spread to the lumbar plexus. Thus, this randomized, double-blinded trial aims to investigate the cutaneous distribution of these three blocks in healthy adult volunteers. Lastly, this study will assess the incidence and severity of lower extremity weakness that may occur with each technique. In addition, this study also seeks to investigate the pharmacokinetics (PK) of lidocaine in each technique. The rationale for this lies in the anatomical differences between the blocks. Theoretically, there may be a difference in the anatomical target for these blocks, but the investigators hypothesize that there is no difference in the local anesthetic absorption. Therefore, as the investigators expect similar systemic absorption, the chances of local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST) should be equally low, and all blocks should be similarly safe.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Ability to provide written informed consent
• Ability and willingness to comply with the study procedures and duration requirements
• ASA physical status 1 or 2
• Age ≥ 18 years
• Weight > 70kg

Exclusion Criteria:

• BMI > 35kg.m2
• Use of analgesics within 24 hours before the procedure
• History of thoracic trauma or surgery
• Abdominal deformities or abnormalities that may prevent proper block performance
• Abdominal tattoos in the area of block performance
• Systemic neuromuscular disease
• Contraindications to regional anesthesia (e.g., infection, allergy, challenging sonoanatomy)
• Structures are unable to be visualized by ultrasound
• Pregnancy
• Other known health conditions that would affect the participant's ability to successfully complete the study

Double