Suppr超能文献

改良经皮指神经阻滞与传统指神经阻滞用于手指麻醉的比较

Modified transthecal digital block versus traditional digital block for anesthesia of the finger.

作者信息

Cummings Alexander J, Tisol William B, Meyer Lynne E

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria, Emergency Medicine Residency Program, OSF Saint Francis Medical Center, 530 NE Glen Oak Avenue, Peoria, IL 61637, USA.

出版信息

J Hand Surg Am. 2004 Jan;29(1):44-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2003.09.018.

Abstract

PURPOSE

This study compared the modified transthecal digital block (MTDB) technique with the traditional digital block (TDB) according to the degree of discomfort caused by injection and to the onset and the duration of anesthesia.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, and controlled study. The same investigator performed all blocks to the middle fingers of each hand. The hand anesthetized and type of block (TDB or MTDB) received first were both randomized. An orientation was given to the 25 participants detailing how to evaluate their own degree of anesthesia. This orientation included establishing a baseline of sensation with a safety pin, a description and diagram of 12 zones of the finger, an explanation of the 10-cm visual analog pain scale, and an explanation of how to record anesthesia progress in the fingers. On completion of each block, the subjects recorded the degree of pain and time to anesthesia in each finger zone.

RESULTS

Twenty-five subjects received 1 TDB and 1 MTDB for a total of 50 blocks. The TDB received a mean rating for pain of 2.972 versus 2.784 for the MTDB (p =.579). The TDB took 3.91 minutes on average to take effect, whereas the MTDB took 7.16 minutes, a difference of 3.25 minutes. This was statistically significant in 11 of the 12 zones. Overall, return to sensation from the MTDB took effect 4.63 minutes sooner than the TDB: on average 85.19 minutes versus 89.82 minutes, respectively. This was statistically significant in 2 of the zones.

CONCLUSIONS

The effect of MTDB is equal to that of TDB in terms of pain perception. For the dorsal and radial proximal zones, the TDB appears to have better distribution of anesthesia. The MTDB has slower onset to anesthesia than the TDB.

摘要

目的

本研究根据注射引起的不适程度、麻醉起效时间和持续时间,比较改良经皮数字阻滞(MTDB)技术与传统数字阻滞(TDB)。

方法

这是一项前瞻性、随机、双盲和对照研究。同一名研究者对每只手的中指进行所有阻滞。首先接受麻醉的手和阻滞类型(TDB或MTDB)均为随机分配。向25名参与者进行了指导,详细说明如何评估他们自己的麻醉程度。该指导包括用安全别针建立感觉基线、手指12个区域的描述和示意图、10厘米视觉模拟疼痛量表的解释以及如何记录手指麻醉进展情况。每次阻滞完成后,受试者记录每个手指区域的疼痛程度和麻醉时间。

结果

25名受试者接受了1次TDB和1次MTDB,共50次阻滞。TDB的平均疼痛评分为2.972,而MTDB为2.784(p = 0.579)。TDB平均起效时间为3.91分钟,而MTDB为7.16分钟,相差3.25分钟。这在12个区域中的11个区域具有统计学意义。总体而言,MTDB恢复感觉比TDB早4.63分钟:平均分别为85.19分钟和89.82分钟。这在2个区域具有统计学意义。

结论

在疼痛感知方面,MTDB的效果与TDB相当。对于背侧和桡侧近端区域,TDB似乎具有更好的麻醉分布。MTDB的麻醉起效比TDB慢。

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