• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

小儿急诊护理中初始疼痛治疗对镇静恢复时间的影响。

Effects of initial pain treatment on sedation recovery time in pediatric emergency care.

作者信息

Losek Joseph D, Reid Samuel

机构信息

Department of Pediatrics, Medical University of South Carolina Children's Hospital, Charleston, SC, USA.

出版信息

Pediatr Emerg Care. 2006 Feb;22(2):100-3. doi: 10.1097/01.pec.0000199566.10006.96.

DOI:10.1097/01.pec.0000199566.10006.96
PMID:16481925
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to compare the sedation recovery times of children receiving ketamine/midazolam (K/M) versus K/M and initial pain treatment (morphine or meperidine) in pediatric emergency care.

METHODS

Study method was a retrospective cross-sectional study of children receiving K/M for procedural sedation analgesia in an urban children's hospital pediatric emergency department (ED). A uniform data collection form was completed for each child.

RESULTS

During an 18-month period, 116 children received K/M for procedural sedation analgesia in the ED. For this study, 80 children met inclusion criteria: 33 patients received K/M only; 32 received K/M and morphine, and 15 received K/M and meperidine. In comparing the K/M only group with the K/M morphine and K/M meperidine groups, the mean ketamine and midazolam doses (mg/kg) were not significantly different. In comparing the recovery times (minutes) for the K/M only group (29.7; SD, 15.7) with the K/M morphine (41.1; SD, 22.4) and K/M meperidine (50.1; SD, 24.9) groups, there was a significant difference for both comparisons (95% confidence interval for difference between 2 means, -20.9 to -1.76 and -32.2 to -8.4, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Sedation (K/M) recovery time is significantly greater for children receiving initial pain treatment (morphine or meperidine). Children receiving meperidine had the longest recovery time. Considering this prolonged recovery time and the unique adverse effects of meperidine compared with morphine, we recommend meperidine not be used for initial ED pain treatment of children.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较在儿科急诊护理中接受氯胺酮/咪达唑仑(K/M)治疗的儿童与接受K/M及初始疼痛治疗(吗啡或哌替啶)的儿童的镇静恢复时间。

方法

研究方法为对一家城市儿童医院急诊科(ED)接受K/M进行程序性镇静镇痛的儿童进行回顾性横断面研究。为每个儿童填写一份统一的数据收集表。

结果

在18个月期间,116名儿童在急诊科接受K/M进行程序性镇静镇痛。在本研究中,80名儿童符合纳入标准:33例患者仅接受K/M;32例接受K/M和吗啡,15例接受K/M和哌替啶。在比较仅接受K/M组与K/M加吗啡组及K/M加哌替啶组时,氯胺酮和咪达唑仑的平均剂量(mg/kg)无显著差异。在比较仅接受K/M组(29.7;标准差,15.7)与K/M加吗啡组(41.1;标准差,22.4)及K/M加哌替啶组(50.1;标准差,24.9)的恢复时间(分钟)时,两项比较均存在显著差异(两组均值差异的95%置信区间分别为-20.9至-1.76和-32.2至-8.4)。

结论

接受初始疼痛治疗(吗啡或哌替啶)的儿童镇静(K/M)恢复时间显著更长。接受哌替啶的儿童恢复时间最长。考虑到这种延长的恢复时间以及哌替啶与吗啡相比独特的不良反应,我们建议哌替啶不应作为儿童急诊科初始疼痛治疗药物。

相似文献

1
Effects of initial pain treatment on sedation recovery time in pediatric emergency care.小儿急诊护理中初始疼痛治疗对镇静恢复时间的影响。
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2006 Feb;22(2):100-3. doi: 10.1097/01.pec.0000199566.10006.96.
2
Does midazolam alter the clinical effects of intravenous ketamine sedation in children? A double-blind, randomized, controlled, emergency department trial.咪达唑仑会改变儿童静脉注射氯胺酮镇静的临床效果吗?一项双盲、随机、对照的急诊科试验。
Ann Emerg Med. 2000 Dec;36(6):579-88. doi: 10.1067/mem.2000.111131.
3
Procedural sedation for insertion of central venous catheters in children: comparison of midazolam/fentanyl with midazolam/ketamine.儿童中心静脉导管置入术中的程序镇静:咪达唑仑/芬太尼与咪达唑仑/氯胺酮的比较。
Paediatr Anaesth. 2007 Apr;17(4):358-63. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2006.02099.x.
4
A randomized, controlled trial of i.v. versus i.m. ketamine for sedation of pediatric patients receiving emergency department orthopedic procedures.一项关于静脉注射与肌肉注射氯胺酮用于接受急诊科骨科手术的儿科患者镇静的随机对照试验。
Ann Emerg Med. 2006 Nov;48(5):605-12. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2006.06.001. Epub 2006 Aug 14.
5
Ketamine/midazolam versus etomidate/fentanyl: procedural sedation for pediatric orthopedic reductions.氯胺酮/咪达唑仑与依托咪酯/芬太尼:用于小儿骨科复位的程序性镇静
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2010 Jun;26(6):408-12. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e3181e057cd.
6
A randomized comparison of nitrous oxide plus hematoma block versus ketamine plus midazolam for emergency department forearm fracture reduction in children.氧化亚氮加血肿阻滞与氯胺酮加咪达唑仑用于儿童急诊科前臂骨折复位的随机对照研究
Pediatrics. 2006 Oct;118(4):e1078-86. doi: 10.1542/peds.2005-1694. Epub 2006 Sep 11.
7
Adverse events associated with procedural sedation and analgesia in a pediatric emergency department: a comparison of common parenteral drugs.儿科急诊科与程序性镇静和镇痛相关的不良事件:常用注射药物的比较。
Acad Emerg Med. 2005 Jun;12(6):508-13. doi: 10.1197/j.aem.2004.12.009.
8
Midazolam with meperidine or fentanyl for colonoscopy: results of a randomized trial.咪达唑仑联合哌替啶或芬太尼用于结肠镜检查:一项随机试验的结果
Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Mar;69(3 Pt 2):681-7. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.09.033.
9
Oral midazolam with and without meperidine for management of the difficult young pediatric dental patient: a retrospective study.口服咪达唑仑联合或不联合哌替啶用于治疗小儿牙科困难患者:一项回顾性研究
Pediatr Dent. 2002 Mar-Apr;24(2):129-38.
10
Low-dose ketamine in addition to propofol for procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department.在急诊科,除丙泊酚外,低剂量氯胺酮用于程序镇静和镇痛。
Ann Pharmacother. 2007 Mar;41(3):485-92. doi: 10.1345/aph.1H522. Epub 2007 Mar 6.

引用本文的文献

1
Effect of Intranasal Ketamine vs Fentanyl on Pain Reduction for Extremity Injuries in Children: The PRIME Randomized Clinical Trial.鼻腔内给予氯胺酮与芬太尼对减轻儿童四肢创伤疼痛的效果:PRIME 随机临床试验。
JAMA Pediatr. 2019 Feb 1;173(2):140-146. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.4582.