Dolin S J, Cashman J N, Bland J M
Pain Clinic, St Richard's Hospital, Chichester PO19 4E, UK.
Br J Anaesth. 2002 Sep;89(3):409-23.
This review examines the evidence from published data concerning the incidence of moderate-severe and of severe pain after major surgery, with three analgesic techniques; intramuscular (i.m.) analgesia, patient controlled analgesia (PCA), and epidural analgesia.
A MEDLINE search of the literature was conducted for publications concerned with the management of postoperative pain. Over 800 original papers and reviews were identified. Of these 212 papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria but only 165 provided usable data on pain intensity and pain relief. Pooled data on pain scores obtained from these studies, which represent the experience of a total of nearly 20,000 patients, form the basis of this review.
Different pain measurement tools provided comparable data. When considering a mixture of three analgesic techniques, the overall mean (95% CI) incidence of moderate-severe pain and of severe pain was 29.7 (26.4-33.0)% and 10.9 (8.4-13.4)%, respectively. The overall mean (95% CI) incidence of poor pain relief and of fair-to-poor pain relief was 3.5 (2.4-4.6)% and 19.4 (16.4-22.3)%, respectively. For i.m. analgesia the incidence of moderate-severe pain was 67.2 (58.1-76.2)% and that of severe pain was 29.1 (18.8-39.4)%. For PCA, the incidence of moderate-severe pain was 35.8 (31.4-40.2)% and that of severe pain was 10.4 (8.0-12.8)%. For epidural analgesia the incidence of moderate-severe pain was 20.9 (17.8-24.0)% and that of severe pain was 7.8 (6.1-9.5)%. The incidence of premature catheter dislodgement was 5.7 (4.0-7.4)%. Over the period 1973-1999 there has been a highly significant (P < 0.0001) reduction in the incidence of moderate-severe pain of 1.9 (1.1-2.7)% per year.
These results suggest that the UK Audit Commission (1997) proposed standards of care might be unachievable using current analgesic techniques. The data may be useful in setting standards of care for Acute Pain Services.
本综述研究了已发表数据中有关三种镇痛技术(肌肉注射镇痛、患者自控镇痛(PCA)和硬膜外镇痛)用于大手术后中重度疼痛和重度疼痛发生率的证据。
对MEDLINE数据库进行文献检索,查找有关术后疼痛管理的出版物。共识别出800多篇原始论文和综述。其中212篇论文符合纳入标准,但只有165篇提供了关于疼痛强度和疼痛缓解的可用数据。从这些研究中获得的疼痛评分汇总数据(代表了近20000名患者的经验)构成了本综述的基础。
不同的疼痛测量工具提供了可比的数据。当考虑三种镇痛技术的综合应用时,中重度疼痛和重度疼痛的总体平均(95%可信区间)发生率分别为29.7(26.4 - 33.0)%和10.9(8.4 - 13.4)%。疼痛缓解不佳和疼痛缓解一般至不佳的总体平均(95%可信区间)发生率分别为3.5(2.4 - 4.6)%和19.4(16.4 - 22.3)%。对于肌肉注射镇痛,中重度疼痛的发生率为67.2(58.1 - 76.2)%,重度疼痛的发生率为29.1(18.8 - 39.4)%。对于PCA,中重度疼痛的发生率为35.8(31.4 - 40.2)%,重度疼痛的发生率为10.4(8.0 - 12.8)%。对于硬膜外镇痛,中重度疼痛的发生率为20.9(17.8 - 24.0)%,重度疼痛的发生率为7.8(6.1 - 9.5)%。导管过早移位的发生率为5.7(4.0 - 7.4)%。在1973 - 1999年期间,中重度疼痛的发生率每年有极显著(P < 0.0001)下降,下降幅度为1.9(1.1 - 2.7)%。
这些结果表明,使用当前的镇痛技术可能无法达到英国审计委员会(1997年)提出的护理标准。这些数据可能有助于制定急性疼痛服务的护理标准。