Back I N, Jenkins K, Blower A, Beckhelling J
Holme Tower Marie Curie Centre, Penarth, Vale of Glamorgan, UK.
Palliat Med. 2001 Jul;15(4):329-36. doi: 10.1191/026921601678320313.
This study looked at the efficacy of drug treatment in managing death rattle in a 30-bedded specialist palliative care unit. The study was conducted in two phases. In the first, patients received hyoscine hydrobromide as the antimuscarinic; glycopyrrolate was used in the second phase. The patients in the two phases were well matched for diagnosis, age, sex and duration of death rattle. A noise score scale of 0-3 was used, which was separately validated using a verbal rating scale and noise-meter readings. Noise scores were taken at the start; 30 min after an antimuscarinic drug was administered; an hour after the initial injection if a repeat dose was given at 30 min; and 4-hourly thereafter. Drug charts of all patients with death rattle were analysed to ascertain the amount of each drug given and the cost. The incidence of death rattle was 44% in phase I, and 36% in phase II. The percentage of patients with reduced noise scores 30 min after one injection of hyoscine was significantly greater than after one dose of glycopyrrolate (56% vs 27%, P = 0.002). The need for a second injection after 30 min was less using hyoscine (33% vs 50%, P = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference in improvement at 1 h, or at the last recorded score before death. A comparison of the cost of drug treatment using hyoscine or glycopyrrolate was made, and the potential reduction in cost per patient in the glycopyrrolate group was largely offset by increased expenditure on other drugs, especially diamorphine, midazolam and levomepromazine. The results of this study suggest that: (1) glycopyrrolate 0.2 mg is less effective at reducing death rattle than hyoscine hydrobromide 0.4 mg when assessed at 30 min, (2) the use of glycopyrrolate may lead to an increased need for other sedative or anti-emetic medication such as diamorphine, midazolam or levomepromazine, and (3) the cost benefit of using glycopyrrolate over hyoscine hydrobromide is a small part of the total drug budget, and may be less than anticipated due to the increased need of these other drugs.
本研究观察了在一家拥有30张床位的专科姑息治疗病房中药物治疗对控制临终喉鸣的疗效。该研究分两个阶段进行。第一阶段,患者接受氢溴酸东莨菪碱作为抗胆碱能药物;第二阶段使用格隆溴铵。两个阶段的患者在诊断、年龄、性别和临终喉鸣持续时间方面匹配良好。使用了0至3的噪声评分量表,该量表分别通过言语评定量表和噪声计读数进行了验证。在开始时、给予抗胆碱能药物30分钟后、若在30分钟时给予重复剂量则在首次注射后1小时以及此后每4小时记录一次噪声评分。分析了所有有临终喉鸣患者的用药记录,以确定每种药物的给药量和费用。第一阶段临终喉鸣的发生率为44%,第二阶段为36%。注射一次氢溴酸东莨菪碱后30分钟时噪声评分降低的患者百分比显著高于注射一次格隆溴铵后(56%对27%,P = 0.002)。使用氢溴酸东莨菪碱在30分钟后需要第二次注射的情况较少(33%对50%,P = 0.03)。在1小时时或死亡前最后记录的评分时改善情况无统计学显著差异。对使用氢溴酸东莨菪碱或格隆溴铵的药物治疗费用进行了比较,格隆溴铵组每位患者潜在的费用降低在很大程度上被其他药物(尤其是二氢吗啡、咪达唑仑和左美丙嗪)支出的增加所抵消。本研究结果表明:(1)在30分钟时评估,0.2毫克格隆溴铵在减轻临终喉鸣方面不如0.4毫克氢溴酸东莨菪碱有效;(2)使用格隆溴铵可能导致对其他镇静或止吐药物(如二氢吗啡、咪达唑仑或左美丙嗪)的需求增加;(3)与氢溴酸东莨菪碱相比,使用格隆溴铵产生的成本效益在药物总预算中占比很小,并且由于对这些其他药物需求的增加,可能低于预期。