Suppr超能文献

急性疼痛管理:对6349例手术患者进行前瞻性研究后的分析、影响及后果

Acute pain management: analysis, implications and consequences after prospective experience with 6349 surgical patients.

作者信息

Brodner G, Mertes N, Buerkle H, Marcus M A, Van Aken H

机构信息

Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie und operative Intensivmedizin der Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, Germany.

出版信息

Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2000 Sep;17(9):566-75. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2346.2000.00738.x.

Abstract

An acute pain service (APS) was set up to improve pain management after operation. We attempted to reduce the length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) of patients undergoing major surgery and to improve their homeostasis and rehabilitation using a multimodal approach (pain relief, stress reduction, early extubation). Patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) was a keystone of this approach. If PCEA was not applicable, patients received patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) instead. Brachial plexus blockade (BPB) was used for surgery of the upper limbs. A computer based documentation system was used to help evaluate prospectively (a) the quality of analgesia, (b) adverse effects and risks of the special pain management techniques, and (c) cost-effectiveness. Patients receiving PCEA (n = 5.602) received a patient-titrated continuous infusion into the epidural space of either bupivacaine 0.175% or ropivacaine 0.2%, with 1 microg sufentanil mL(-1) added, followed by patient-controlled boluses of 2 mL (lockout time 20 min). For patients receiving PCIA (n = 634) an initial bolus of 7.5-15 mg piritramide was given, and the subsequent bolus was 2 mg (lockout time 10 min). A continuous infusion of bupivacaine 0.25% was administered to patients receiving BPB (n = 113). The dose was titrated to a dynamic visual analogue scale (VAS) scores < 40. The mean treatment periods were: BPB = 4.33 days, PCEA = 5.6 days, PCIA = 5.0 days. In the case of PCEA, the quality of pain relief, vigilance and satisfaction were superior compared with the PCIA method, which resulted in greater sedation and nausea. Although personal supervision was higher for the PCEA-treated patients, cost analysis revealed final savings of Euro 91,620 for the year 1998 obviating the need for an ICU stay totalling 433 days. Provided that PCEA is part of a fast-track protocol employing early tracheal extubation and optimal perioperative management, the associated initial higher costs will be recouped by the benefits to patients of better pain relief after surgery and fewer days subsequently spent in the ITU.

摘要

设立了急性疼痛服务(APS)以改善术后疼痛管理。我们试图通过多模式方法(疼痛缓解、减轻应激、早期拔管)来缩短接受大手术患者在重症监护病房(ICU)的住院时间,并改善他们的内环境稳定和康复情况。患者自控硬膜外镇痛(PCEA)是该方法的关键。如果PCEA不适用,患者则改用患者自控静脉镇痛(PCIA)。臂丛神经阻滞(BPB)用于上肢手术。使用基于计算机的文档系统来前瞻性地帮助评估:(a)镇痛质量;(b)特殊疼痛管理技术的不良反应和风险;(c)成本效益。接受PCEA的患者(n = 5602)接受患者自行滴定的持续输注,将0.175%的布比卡因或0.2%的罗哌卡因注入硬膜外腔,每毫升添加1微克舒芬太尼,随后患者自控推注2毫升(锁定时间20分钟)。对于接受PCIA的患者(n = 634),初始推注7.5 - 15毫克匹米诺定,随后的推注量为2毫克(锁定时间10分钟)。接受BPB的患者(n = 113)给予0.25%布比卡因持续输注。剂量根据动态视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分<40进行滴定。平均治疗时间为:BPB = 4.33天,PCEA = 5.6天,PCIA = 5.0天。在PCEA情况下,与PCIA方法相比,疼痛缓解质量、警觉性和满意度更高,PCIA方法会导致更严重的镇静和恶心。虽然接受PCEA治疗的患者个人监督更高,但成本分析显示,1998年最终节省了91,620欧元,无需总计433天的ICU住院时间。只要PCEA是采用早期气管拔管和最佳围手术期管理的快速康复方案的一部分,相关的初始较高成本将因术后更好的疼痛缓解以及随后在重症监护病房花费天数减少对患者带来的益处而得到弥补。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验