...
首页> 外文期刊>British journal of anaesthesia >Topical anaesthesia and intravenous cannulation success in paediatric patients: a randomized double-blind trial.
【24h】

Topical anaesthesia and intravenous cannulation success in paediatric patients: a randomized double-blind trial.

机译:儿科患者的局部麻醉和静脉插管成功:一项随机双盲试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

BACKGROUND: It is not known whether the choice of topical anaesthetic influences the likelihood of successful i.v. cannulation in the paediatric population. The null hypothesis of this study was that no difference exists in the initial success rate of cannulation between two commonly used topical anaesthetics. METHODS: A randomized double-blind trial conducted on patients between the age of 12 months and 12 yr presenting to a tertiary hospital emergency department. Patients requiring cannulation were randomized to either 4% amethocaine gel (AnGEL) or 5% lidocaine and prilocaine in a 1:1 emulsion (EMLA). The primary endpoint was success of initial attempt at i.v. cannulation. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-seven patients were analysed of 203 enrolled. The success rate of AnGEL (73/97, 75%) and EMLA (59/80, 74%) did not significantly differ (chi2(1) 0.05, P=0.82). CONCLUSIONS: No difference exists in the cannulation success rates between the two anaesthetics. The choice of topical anaesthetic in paediatric cannulation should be based on other factors such as cost, time to anaesthesia, efficacy of the agent, and adverse effect profile.
机译:背景:目前尚不清楚局部麻醉剂的选择是否会影响静脉内麻醉成功的可能性。在儿科人群中插管。这项研究的零假设是,两种常用的局部麻醉药在插管的初始成功率上没有差异。方法:对出现在三级医院急诊科的12个月至12岁之间的患者进行的一项随机双盲试验。需要插管的患者被随机分配至1:1乳剂(EMLA)中的4%氨甲卡因凝胶(AnGEL)或5%利多卡因和丙胺卡因。主要终点指标是在i.v.插管。结果:对203例入组患者的177例患者进行了分析。 AnGEL(73/97,75%)和EMLA(59/80,74%)的成功率没有显着差异(chi2(1)0.05,P = 0.82)。结论:两种麻醉药的插管成功率没有差异。小儿插管中局部麻醉的选择应基于其他因素,例如成本,麻醉时间,药物疗效和不良反应情况。

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