Suppr超能文献

以色列急诊科腹痛镇痛意见调查。

Opinion survey of analgesia for abdominal pain in Israeli emergency departments.

作者信息

Zimmerman Ofer, Halpern Pinchas

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel.

出版信息

Isr Med Assoc J. 2004 Nov;6(11):681-5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The long-standing and ongoing controversy regarding administration of analgesia to patients with acute abdominal pain prior to final diagnosis has not yet been resolved, despite considerable research. Consequently, wide variations in clinical practice exist.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the motives, attitudes and practices of emergency physicians, internists and surgeons in Israeli emergency departments regarding the administration of analgesia before diagnosis in patients with acute abdominal pain.

METHODS

Questionnaires were completed by 122 physicians in 21 EDs throughout Israel and the replies were analyzed.

RESULTS

Most EDs did not have a clear policy on analgesia for undifferentiated abdominal pain, according to 65% of the responders. More internists (75%) than surgeons (54%) (P = 0.02) and more emergency physicians (81%) than all other physicians (60%) (P = 0.05) held this opinion. Most respondents (64%) supported administration of analgesia pre-diagnostically. Support for analgesia was significantly stronger among internists (75%) compared to surgeons (52%) (P = 0.03). Despite this wide support, most respondents (68%) indicated that analgesia was rarely or never given prediagnostically and, when it was, more surgeons (58%) than other physicians made that decision. Most internists (73%) and all surgeons reported that patients receive analgesia only after being examined by surgeons. Time allocated to the ED (part or full-time) significantly (P = 0.02) influenced decision-making, with 51% of part-time physicians vs. 25% of full-time opposing prompt administration of analgesia. Opinions on who should decide were divided according to medical specialty, with surgeons and internists almost opposed, as well as by physician age and percent of his/her time spent working in the ED. More surgeons than internists (P = 0.0005) reported that analgesia sometimes interfered with making a diagnosis. Most physicians (90%) stated that opiates impede diagnosis to some extent. However, 58% of them supported the administration of opiates, more or less frequently. Intramuscular diclofenac was the most preferred analgesic, followed by intravenous morphine and pethidine; individual preferences extended beyond the list of actually administered drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no consensus on the administration of analgesia for undiagnosed acute abdominal pain in EDs in Israel. Physicians' attitudes are influenced by training, experience, and percent of personal time allocated to work in the ED.

摘要

背景

尽管进行了大量研究,但关于在最终诊断之前对急性腹痛患者进行镇痛治疗的长期且持续的争议仍未得到解决。因此,临床实践中存在很大差异。

目的

确定以色列急诊科的急诊医师、内科医师和外科医师在对急性腹痛患者进行诊断前给予镇痛治疗方面的动机、态度和做法。

方法

以色列各地21个急诊科的122名医师填写了问卷,并对回复进行了分析。

结果

根据65%的受访者,大多数急诊科对于未分化腹痛的镇痛治疗没有明确的政策。持这种观点的内科医师(75%)多于外科医师(54%)(P = 0.02),急诊医师(81%)多于其他所有医师(60%)(P = 0.05)。大多数受访者(64%)支持在诊断前给予镇痛治疗。与外科医师(52%)相比,内科医师(75%)对镇痛治疗的支持明显更强(P = 0.03)。尽管得到广泛支持,但大多数受访者(68%)表示在诊断前很少或从不给予镇痛治疗,而当给予镇痛治疗时,做出该决定的外科医师(58%)多于其他医师。大多数内科医师(73%)和所有外科医师报告称患者仅在接受外科医师检查后才接受镇痛治疗。分配给急诊科的时间(兼职或全职)对决策有显著影响(P = 0.02),51%的兼职医师反对立即给予镇痛治疗,而全职医师中这一比例为25%。关于应由谁做出决定的意见根据医学专业、医师年龄以及其在急诊科工作时间的百分比而有所不同,外科医师和内科医师几乎意见相左。报告称镇痛治疗有时会干扰诊断的外科医师多于内科医师(P = 0.0005)。大多数医师(90%)表示阿片类药物在某种程度上会妨碍诊断。然而,其中58%的人或多或少支持使用阿片类药物。肌内注射双氯芬酸是最受欢迎的镇痛药,其次是静脉注射吗啡和哌替啶;个人偏好超出了实际使用药物的清单。

结论

以色列急诊科对于未确诊的急性腹痛的镇痛治疗没有达成共识。医师的态度受培训、经验以及分配给急诊科工作的个人时间百分比的影响。

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