...
首页> 外文期刊>The Internet Journal of Anesthesiology >Prevention of Pain on Propofol Injection: A Comparative, Randomized, Double Blind Study between Lignocaine, Pethidine, Dexamethasone and Placebo
【24h】

Prevention of Pain on Propofol Injection: A Comparative, Randomized, Double Blind Study between Lignocaine, Pethidine, Dexamethasone and Placebo

机译:丙泊酚注射液的疼痛预防:利尼卡因,哌替丁,地塞米松和安慰剂之间的比较,随机,双盲研究

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: Propofol is wonderful drug for short duration procedures. However, pain on injection of propofol, which has been reported to occur in 28-90% of patients, is a major drawback to its use. Different methods have been used to decrease this pain but intravenous lignocaine is most commonly used pretreatment.Methods : A comparative, randomized, double blind study was undertaken to compare the efficacy of three drugs for prevention of pain on propofol injection on induction of anaesthesia 100 female patients of ASA status 1 and 2 posted for intracavitary radiotherapy were allocated randomly in four groups of 25 each, using computer- generated table of random numbers. Venous occlusion was made with tourniquet for one minute. The study drug intravenous lignocaine 1% 2ml (group 1), pethidine 25mg in 2 ml (group2), dexamethasone 4mg in 2ml (group 3), or normal saline 2ml (group 4) was administered over 10 seconds according to random number. There after occlusion was released and intravenous propofol was given. After the first 25% of propofol given, patients were asked for intensity of pain she experienced. Results: Lignocaine, pethidine and dexamethasone significantly reduces the pain on propofol injection in comparison to placebo (p 0.002), but there was no significant difference in pain score among groups 1, 2, 3 (p 0.28). There was no significant difference in recall of pain among groups 1, 2, and 3 (p 0.43). Although there was significant difference between placebo group and other three groups (p 0.009).Conclusion: It was concluded that lignocaine, pethidine and dexamethasone significantly reduces the pain induced by propofol injection pain as compared to placebo but there is no difference in efficacy for prevention of pain among these three groups. Introduction Propofol is frequently used intravenous anaesthetic induction agent, especially for brief cases, day care surgery or when a laryngeal mask airway is to be used. Pain on injection with propofol is a common problem and can be very distressing to the patient. Incidence of pain varies between 28% and 90 %( Stark RD et al 1955 & Mangar D et al 1992) in adults and 28% -85% in children (Valtonen M et al 1988 & 1989) .The younger the child, the higher is the incidence and severity of propofol injection pain (Cameron E et al 1992). This could be due to small veins in hand. Many factors appear to affect the incidence of pain, which includes site of injection, size of vein, speed of injection, buffering effect of blood, temperature of propofol and concomitant use of drugs such as local anaesthetics and opiates. Pain on injection of propofol can be immediate or delayed. Immediate pain probably results from a direct irritant effect whereas delayed pain probably results from an indirect effect via the kinin cascade. Delayed pain has latency of between 10 and 20 s (Briggs LP et al 1981). The sensation produced is usually described as tingling, cold, or numbing or, at its worst, a severe burning pain proximal to the site of injection. This sensation tends to occur within 10-20 s of injection and lasts only for the duration of injection. Despite this discomfort, the incidence of venous sequelae, such as phlebitis, is less than 1 % (Mattila MAK et al 1985).Different methods have been used to decrease this discomfort, including cooling, adding lignocaine, applying nitroglycerine ointment to the venepuncture site, injecting cold saline prior to the injection of propofol, and diluting the propofol with 5% dextrose or intralipid. Intravenous lignocaine is the most commonly used pretreatment, but has a failure rate of 13% to 32% (Scott RPF et al 1988 & Kingsy 1992 et al). Pethidine is synthetic opioid analgesic with proven local anaesthetic effects (Power I et al 1991 & Famewo et al 1985). Dexamethasone is a steroid it also used for postoperative vomiting and pain after pediatric tonsillectomy (Mokhtar E et al 2003). We had done a double-blind comparison of lignocaine, pethidine, Dexamet
机译:背景:异丙酚是短期手术的绝佳药物。但是,据报道在28-90%的患者中发生了注射异丙酚的疼痛,这是其使用的主要缺点。方法:已采用了不同的方法减轻疼痛,但最常用的方法是静脉注射木质素。方法:进行了一项比较,随机,双盲研究,比较了三种药物在异丙酚注射液诱导麻醉后预防疼痛的效果。100女性使用计算机生成的随机数表,将经过腔内放疗的ASA状态1和2的患者随机分为四组,每组25个。用止血带将静脉阻塞一分钟。根据随机数,在10秒钟内给予研究药物静脉注射1%木质素卡因2ml(组1),哌替啶25mg /组2ml(组2),地塞米松2mg /组2ml(组3)或生理盐水2ml(组4)。释放闭塞后,给予异丙酚静脉注射。服用首批25%的异丙酚后,询问患者所经历的疼痛强度。结果:与安慰剂相比,利多卡因,哌替啶和地塞米松显着减轻了异丙酚注射时的疼痛(P = 0.002),但第1、2、3组之间的疼痛评分没有显着差异(P = 0.28)。在第1、2和3组中,疼痛的回忆没有显着差异(P = 0.43)。尽管安慰剂组与其他三组之间存在显着差异(p 0.009)。结论:结论:与安慰剂相比,利多卡因,哌替啶和地塞米松可显着减轻丙泊酚注射痛引起的疼痛,但预防效果无差异这三组之间的痛苦。简介丙泊酚是常用的静脉麻醉剂,特别是在小病例,日托手术或使用喉罩气道的情况下。异丙酚注射时的疼痛是一个常见问题,可能会使患者感到非常痛苦。成人的疼痛发生率在28%到90%之间(Stark RD等人1955和Mangar D等1992),而儿童则为28%-85%(Valtonen M等人1988&1989)。儿童年龄越小是异丙酚注射痛的发生率和严重程度(Cameron E et al 1992)。这可能是由于手中的小静脉。许多因素似乎会影响疼痛的发生,包括注射部位,静脉大小,注射速度,血液的缓冲作用,丙泊酚的温度以及药物的同时使用,例如局部麻醉剂和鸦片制剂。异丙酚注射后的疼痛可以立即或延迟。立即疼痛可能是直接刺激作用引起的,而延迟疼痛可能是由于激肽级联反应的间接作用引起的。延迟疼痛的潜伏期在10到20 s之间(Briggs LP等1981)。通常将产生的感觉描述为刺痛,感冒或麻木,或者最坏的情况是靠近注射部位的剧烈灼痛。这种感觉倾向于在注射后10到20 s内发生,并且仅持续到注射期间。尽管有这种不适感,静脉后遗症(如静脉炎)的发生率仍不到1%(Mattila MAK et al 1985)。已经采用了多种方法来减轻这种不适感,包括冷却,加利多卡因,在穿刺部位使用硝酸甘油软膏。 ,在注射丙泊酚之前先注射冷盐水,然后用5%葡萄糖或脂质体内稀释丙泊酚。静脉注射木质素卡因是最常用的预处理方法,但失败率在13%至32%之间(Scott RPF等,1988; Kingsy,1992等)。哌替啶是具有已知局部麻醉作用的合成阿片类镇痛药(Power I等,1991; Famewo等,1985)。地塞米松是一种类固醇,它还用于小儿扁桃体切除术后的呕吐和疼痛(Mokhtar E等人2003)。我们对利多卡因,哌替丁,地克沙美进行了双盲比较

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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