Suppr超能文献

[与曲马多和安乃近连续弹性泵输注相比,患者自控镇痛的成本效益分析]

[Cost-effectiveness analysis of patient-controlled analgesia compared to continuous elastomeric pump infusion of tramadol and metamizole].

作者信息

Hernández García D, Lara Vila I, Caba Barrientos F, Ramos Curado P, Núñez García A, Echevarría Moreno M

机构信息

Servicio de Anestesiología y Reanimación, Hospital Universitario de Valme, Sevilla.

出版信息

Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2007 Apr;54(4):213-20.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Little information is available on the cost-effectiveness of postoperative patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). The present study compared PCA to continuous infusion by elastomeric pump.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Fifty ASA 1 or 2 patients undergoing major gynecologic surgery were enrolled for a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and costs derived from intravenous PCA with metamizole and tramadol compared to continuous infusion of the same analgesic solution by elastomeric pump in the 48 hours following surgery. Patient satisfaction and side effects were also recorded.

RESULTS

The analgesic effectiveness and side effects of the 2 regimens were similar, although 61% of patients in the elastomeric pump group needed morphine for rescue analgesia compared to 33% in the PCA group (P < .05). In the PCA group, 81% of the patients said they would repeat the analgesic treatment compared to only 56% in the elastomeric pump group (P = .05). The mean number of nursing interventions was 16 for the PCA group and 19 for the elastomeric pump group. The mean cost of the treatment (not including the PCA pump, provided by the manufacturer) was Euros 41.35 for the PCA group and Euros 56.22 for the elastomeric pump group.

CONCLUSIONS

The analgesic efficacy of the 2 regimens was similar. However, patient satisfaction was greater with PCA and use of an elastomeric pump was more expensive. In the setting of the present study, postoperative PCA proved to be more advantageous than continuous elastomeric pump infusion.

摘要

目的

关于术后患者自控镇痛(PCA)的成本效益的信息较少。本研究将PCA与弹性泵持续输注进行了比较。

材料与方法

五十例接受大型妇科手术的美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)1或2级患者被纳入一项随机对照试验,以评估在术后48小时内,与通过弹性泵持续输注相同镇痛溶液相比,静脉注射安乃近和曲马多进行PCA的有效性和成本。还记录了患者满意度和副作用。

结果

两种方案的镇痛效果和副作用相似,尽管弹性泵组61%的患者需要吗啡进行补救镇痛,而PCA组为33%(P <.05)。在PCA组中,81%的患者表示他们会重复这种镇痛治疗,而弹性泵组只有56%(P =.05)。PCA组的护理干预平均次数为16次,弹性泵组为19次。治疗的平均成本(不包括由制造商提供的PCA泵),PCA组为41.35欧元,弹性泵组为56.22欧元。

结论

两种方案的镇痛效果相似。然而,PCA的患者满意度更高,且使用弹性泵更昂贵。在本研究的背景下,术后PCA被证明比弹性泵持续输注更具优势。

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