Suppr超能文献

丙泊酚/芬太尼与氯胺酮/咪达唑仑用于儿科急诊科短暂骨科手术镇静的比较。

Comparison of propofol/fentanyl versus ketamine/midazolam for brief orthopedic procedural sedation in a pediatric emergency department.

作者信息

Godambe Sandip A, Elliot Vanessa, Matheny Dana, Pershad Jay

机构信息

Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, LeBonheur Children's Medical Center, Memphis, Tennessee, USA.

出版信息

Pediatrics. 2003 Jul;112(1 Pt 1):116-23. doi: 10.1542/peds.112.1.116.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the effectiveness of 2 medication regimens, propofol/fentanyl (P/F) and ketamine/midazolam (K/M), for brief orthopedic emergency department procedural sedation. This study was powered to compare recovery times (RT) and procedural distress as measured by the Observational Score of Behavioral Distress-revised (OSBD-r; range: 0-23.5 with 23.5 representing maximal distress).

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, partially-blinded controlled comparative trial comparing intravenous P/F with K/M in a convenience sample of 113 patients aged 3 to 18 years old undergoing orthopedic procedural sedation. All medications were administered by the intermittent intravenous bolus method. An independent sedation nurse recorded total sedation time and RT. Effectiveness was measured using 6 parameters: 1) patient distress as assessed by independent blinded observers after videotape review using the OSBD-r; 2) orthopedic satisfaction score (Likert scale 1-5); 3) sedation nurse satisfaction score (Likert 1-5); 4) parental perception of procedural pain using a 0 to 100 mm Visual Analog Scale with the upper limit being "most pain"; 5) patient recall of the procedure; and 6) 1 to 3 week follow-up.

RESULTS

RT and total sedation time were significantly less in the P/F group than in the K/M group (33.4 minutes vs 23.2 minutes). The mean OSBD-r scores during manipulation were 0.084 and 0.278 for the K/M and P/F groups, respectively. Although this difference was statistically significant (95% confidence interval for the mean difference -0.34 to -0.048), both regimens were successful in keeping the scores low. There was no statistical difference between the groups in the other measures of effectiveness. There was a statistically significant difference between the groups in the occurrence of desaturation and late side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

RT with P/F is shorter than with K/M. P/F is comparable to K/M in reducing procedural distress associated with painful orthopedic procedures in the pediatric emergency department. Although propofol has a greater potential of respiratory depression and airway obstruction as compared with ketamine, it offers some unique advantages including a quicker offset and smoother recovery profile.

摘要

目的

比较丙泊酚/芬太尼(P/F)和氯胺酮/咪达唑仑(K/M)两种药物方案用于骨科急诊科简短操作镇静的有效性。本研究旨在比较恢复时间(RT)以及通过行为痛苦观察评分修订版(OSBD-r;范围:0 - 23.5,23.5表示最大痛苦)测量的操作痛苦程度。

方法

我们进行了一项前瞻性、部分双盲对照比较试验,在113例年龄3至18岁接受骨科操作镇静的患者便利样本中,比较静脉注射P/F与K/M的效果。所有药物均采用静脉间歇推注法给药。一名独立的镇静护士记录总镇静时间和RT。使用6个参数评估有效性:1)在录像回顾后,由独立的盲法观察者使用OSBD-r评估患者痛苦程度;2)骨科满意度评分(李克特量表1 - 5);3)镇静护士满意度评分(李克特量表1 - 5);4)父母使用0至100毫米视觉模拟量表评估操作疼痛程度,上限为“最疼”;5)患者对操作的回忆;6)1至3周随访。

结果

P/F组的RT和总镇静时间显著短于K/M组(33.4分钟对23.2分钟)。K/M组和P/F组在操作期间的平均OSBD-r评分分别为0.084和0.278。虽然这种差异具有统计学意义(平均差异的95%置信区间为 -0.34至 -0.048),但两种方案均成功使评分保持在较低水平。在其他有效性指标上,两组之间无统计学差异。两组在发生低氧血症和迟发副作用方面存在统计学差异。

结论

P/F的RT比K/M短。在减少儿科急诊科与疼痛性骨科操作相关的操作痛苦方面,P/F与K/M相当。尽管与氯胺酮相比,丙泊酚有更大的呼吸抑制和气道梗阻风险,但它具有一些独特优势,包括起效更快和恢复过程更平稳。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验