...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Hand Surgery. American Volume >Modified transthecal digital block versus traditional digital block for anesthesia of the finger.
【24h】

Modified transthecal digital block versus traditional digital block for anesthesia of the finger.

机译:改良的经鞘式数字阻滞相对于传统的数字阻滞进行手指麻醉。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

PURPOSE: This study compared the modified transthecal digital block (MTDB) technique with the traditional digital block (TDB) according to the degree of discomfort caused by injection and to the onset and the duration of anesthesia. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, and controlled study. The same investigator performed all blocks to the middle fingers of each hand. The hand anesthetized and type of block (TDB or MTDB) received first were both randomized. An orientation was given to the 25 participants detailing how to evaluate their own degree of anesthesia. This orientation included establishing a baseline of sensation with a safety pin, a description and diagram of 12 zones of the finger, an explanation of the 10-cm visual analog pain scale, and an explanation of how to record anesthesia progress in the fingers. On completion of each block, the subjects recorded the degree of pain and time to anesthesia in each finger zone. RESULTS: Twenty-five subjects received 1 TDB and 1MTDB for a total of 50 blocks. The TDB received a mean rating for pain of 2.972 versus 2.784 for the MTDB (p =.579). The TDB took 3.91 minutes on average to take effect, whereas the MTDB took 7.16 minutes, a difference of 3.25 minutes. This was statistically significant in 11 of the 12 zones. Overall, return to sensation from the MTDB took effect 4.63 minutes sooner than the TDB: on average 85.19 minutes versus 89.82 minutes, respectively. This was statistically significant in 2 of the zones. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of MTDB is equal to that of TDB in terms of pain perception. For the dorsal and radial proximal zones, the TDB appears to have better distribution of anesthesia. The MTDB has slower onset to anesthesia than the TDB.
机译:目的:本研究根据注射引起的不适程度,麻醉的开始时间和持续时间,将改良的经皮穿刺数字阻滞术(MTDB)与传统的数字阻滞术(TDB)进行了比较。方法:这是一项前瞻性,随机,双盲和对照研究。同一位调查员对每只手的中指进行了所有阻滞。首先将麻醉的手和首先接受的阻滞类型(TDB或MTDB)随机化。对25位参与者进行了介绍,详细介绍了如何评估自己的麻醉程度。此方向包括使用安全别针建立感觉基线,对手指12个区域的描述和图示,对10厘米视觉模拟疼痛等级的解释以及对如何记录手指麻醉过程的解释。在完成每个阻滞后,受试者记录每个手指区域的疼痛程度和麻醉时间。结果:25名受试者接受了1个TDB和1MTDB,共计50座。 TDB的平均疼痛评分为2.972,而MTDB的平均评分为2.784(p = .579)。 TDB平均需要3.91分钟才能生效,而MTDB则需要7.16分钟,相差3.25分钟。这在12个区域中的11个区域具有统计学意义。总体而言,MTDB引起的轰动比TDB早4.63分钟生效:分别为85.19分钟和89.82分钟。这在两个区域中具有统计学意义。结论:就疼痛知觉而言,MTDB的效果与TDB相同。对于背侧和radial骨近端区域,TDB似乎具有更好的麻醉分布。 MTDB的麻醉起效要比TDB慢。

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