首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Archives of Emergency Medicine >Topical anaesthesia for childrens lacerations: an acceptable approach?
【2h】

Topical anaesthesia for childrens lacerations: an acceptable approach?

机译:儿童撕裂伤的局部麻醉:可以接受的方法吗?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

OBJECTIVE--To compare the anaesthetic properties of conventional intradermal 1% plain lignocaine with a topical gel preparation of adrenaline (1:2000) and cocaine (4.7%) for use in treatment of children's lacerations. METHODS--Children aged 3-16 years with lacerations (not of the digits or mucous membranes) were consecutively assigned to receive either adrenaline and cocaine (AC) or lignocaine. Pain scores, as perceived by patients, parents, and staff, were measured conventionally using Wong Baker faces and visual analogue scales on administration of the local anaesthetic and on suturing the wound in the AC group (n = 56) and the lignocaine group (n = 51). RESULTS--Mean and median pain scores on administration of the anaesthetic in the AC group were significantly lower than in the lignocaine group as perceived by patient (P < 0.001), parent (P < 0.001), and staff (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in mean and median pain scores between the two groups on suturing the wounds, as perceived by patient, parent and staff. There was a significantly higher number of "failed" anaesthetics (pain scores 8-10) in the lignocaine group (P < 0.01). On direct questioning the overall procedure was considered acceptable by 84.5% of parents in the AC group compared with 61% of parents in the lignocaine group (P < 0.01). There were no significant complications in either group. CONCLUSIONS--Topical AC should be considered the local anaesthetic of first choice for suturing appropriate children's lacerations.
机译:目的-比较传统的皮内1%普通木素卡因与局部用肾上腺素(1:2000)和可卡因(4.7%)制成的凝胶制剂的麻醉性能,以治疗儿童撕裂伤。方法-连续3至16岁有撕裂伤的儿童(手指或黏膜未撕裂)接受肾上腺素和可卡因(AC)或利多卡因治疗。在AC组(n = 56)和利多卡因组(n = 56)中,常规使用Wong Baker面部和视觉模拟量表对患者,父母和工作人员的疼痛评分进行测量,以进行局部麻醉和缝合伤口= 51)。结果-在AC组中,麻醉组的平均疼痛疼痛评分和中位疼痛评分显着低于利格卡因组,患者(P <0.001),父母(P <0.001)和工作人员(P <0.001)均认为。如患者,父母和工作人员所知,两组伤口缝合的平均疼痛分数和中位疼痛分数均无显着差异。木质素卡因组的“失败”麻醉药(疼痛评分8-10)明显更高(P <0.01)。直接询问后,AC组中84.5%的父母认为总体程序可以接受,而利多卡因组中61%的父母认为是可接受的(P <0.01)。两组均无明显并发症。结论-外用AC应该被认为是缝合适当儿童撕裂伤的首选局部麻醉剂。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号