Clarke R W, Jones A S, Charters P, Sherman I
University Department of Otorhinolaryngology, University of Liverpool, UK.
Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1992 Oct;17(5):383-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2273.1992.tb01679.x.
50 subjects were admitted into a randomized double-blind placebo controlled cross-over trial with 4% lignocaine as the active drug and normal saline as the placebo. Each subject had 2 ml of solution sprayed into each nasal cavity and all subjects had both sprays but on different occasions. The order in which the sprays were administered was randomized. The subjective sensation of nasal airflow was measured using a visual analogue scale before and after the spray. These measurements were made under conditions of the same airflow rate, which was monitored throughout the experiment using a reprogrammed NR6 rhinomanometer. Objective nasal patency was measured as peak nasal inspiratory flow rate. It was found that the nasal sensation of airflow decreased slightly after both lignocaine (difference between medians 5.0; 95% confidence interval -2.91 to 6.11) and normal saline (difference between medians 6.0; 95% confidence interval -1.02 to 7.21). Nonparametric analysis of variance showed this difference to be non-significant (P = 0.73). In addition there was no significant change in objective nasal patency. The results suggest that nerve endings in the nasal mucosa play no part in sensing nasal airflow during respiration.
50名受试者被纳入一项随机双盲安慰剂对照交叉试验，以4%的利多卡因作为活性药物，生理盐水作为安慰剂。每名受试者每侧鼻腔喷入2毫升溶液，所有受试者均接受两种喷雾剂，但在不同时间。喷雾剂的给药顺序是随机的。在喷雾前后使用视觉模拟量表测量鼻气流的主观感觉。这些测量是在相同气流速率的条件下进行的，在整个实验过程中使用重新编程的NR6鼻阻力计进行监测。客观鼻通畅度以鼻吸气峰值流速来衡量。结果发现，利多卡因（中位数差值5.0；95%置信区间-2.91至6.11）和生理盐水（中位数差值6.0；95%置信区间-1.02至7.21）喷雾后鼻气流感觉均略有下降。非参数方差分析显示这种差异无统计学意义（P = 0.73）。此外，客观鼻通畅度没有显著变化。结果表明，鼻黏膜中的神经末梢在呼吸过程中对鼻气流的感知不起作用。
