Department of Internal Medicine, Post-Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
Saudi J Gastroenterol. 2010 Oct-Dec;16(4):280-4. doi: 10.4103/1319-3767.70616.
BACKGROUND/AIM: We aimed to study whether sedation reduces discomfort during endoscopy and a comparison of longer-acting diazepam with shorter-acting midazolam.
A prospective, randomized, single-blinded study was conducted at the Department of Medicine at Government Medical College and Hospital, Chandigarh, and was completed over a period of 6 months. The patients were randomized to receive either placebo or sedation with midazolam or diazepam before endoscopy. The endoscopist and the observer recording patient's/physician's responses were blinded to the drugs administered. Two hundred and fifty two consecutive patients undergoing diagnostic or therapeutic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy were recruited. The patient's discomfort and the physician's comfort during the procedure were recorded on a visual analogue scale rated from 1-10 with-in 10 minutes of the procedure by an independent observer. The Patient's discomfort ratings were further divided into 3 groups, comfortable (score, 1-3), satisfactory (score, 4-7) and uncomfortable (a score of >7). Similarly the physician's ease of performing the procedure was also recorded on the same scale. This was again divided into 3 groups: easy (score, 1-3), satisfactory (score, 4-7) and difficult (a score of >7).
Out of the total of 252 patients, 82 patients received no sedation (group I), 85 received diazepam (group II) and 85 received midazolam (group III). There was no statistical difference in the discomfort experienced by the patients during endoscopy when sedation was used (P=0.0754). Out of 252 patients, 49 underwent endoscopic procedures. Nineteen patients were included in group I, 18 in group II and 12 in group III. Only 10 (20%) patients undergoing endoscopic procedures complained of significant discomfort, but there was no difference in the ones undergoing interventions with or without sedation (P=0.854). The physicians were more comfortable in performing endoscopic procedure in sedated patients, however, the difference between patients in group II and group III was not statistically significant (P=0.0461). Both diazepam and midazolam fared equally well in increasing physician's comfort (P=0.617).
There was no difference in the patient's discomfort with regard to the sedative used (midazolam or diazepam). Although endoscopy was easy or satisfactory in the majority of patients in the unsedated as well as the sedated groups, more often the endoscopist found it difficult to do endoscopy on the unsedated patients.
背景/目的:我们旨在研究镇静是否会减轻内镜检查过程中的不适,并比较长效地西泮和短效咪达唑仑。
在昌迪加尔政府医学院和医院内科进行了一项前瞻性、随机、单盲研究,历时 6 个月完成。患者被随机分配接受安慰剂或咪达唑仑或地西泮镇静。内镜医生和记录患者/医生反应的观察者对给予的药物不知情。招募了 252 例连续接受诊断或治疗性上消化道内镜检查的患者。在操作后 10 分钟内,由独立观察者使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)对患者的不适和医生在操作过程中的舒适度进行评分,评分范围为 1-10。患者的不适评分进一步分为 3 组:舒适(评分 1-3)、满意(评分 4-7)和不适(评分>7)。同样,医生进行操作的难易程度也按照相同的标准进行记录。这也分为 3 组:容易(评分 1-3)、满意(评分 4-7)和困难(评分>7)。
在 252 例患者中,82 例未接受镇静(I 组),85 例接受地西泮(II 组),85 例接受咪达唑仑(III 组)。在使用镇静剂时,患者在内镜检查过程中的不适程度没有统计学差异(P=0.0754)。在 252 例患者中,49 例行内镜检查。19 例患者纳入 I 组,18 例纳入 II 组,12 例纳入 III 组。只有 10 例(20%)接受内镜检查的患者抱怨有明显不适,但接受干预治疗的患者与未接受镇静的患者之间没有差异(P=0.854)。在接受镇静的患者中,医生进行内镜检查更为舒适,但 II 组和 III 组之间的差异无统计学意义(P=0.0461)。地西泮和咪达唑仑在增加医生舒适度方面效果相当(P=0.617)。
镇静药物(咪达唑仑或地西泮)的使用对患者的不适程度没有影响。尽管在未镇静和镇静组的大多数患者中,内镜检查都容易或满意,但内镜医生往往发现对未镇静的患者进行内镜检查更困难。