• 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

在急诊科使用异丙酚进行程序镇静和镇痛:与咪达唑仑的比较。

The use of propofol for procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department: a comparison with midazolam.

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, USM, Kubang Kerian 16150, Malaysia.

出版信息

Emerg Med J. 2011 Oct;28(10):861-5. doi: 10.1136/emj.2009.085019. Epub 2010 Nov 23.

DOI:10.1136/emj.2009.085019
PMID:21098799
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of propofol as an alternative agent for procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) in the emergency department (ED) and to make a comparison between two different sedative (propofol vs midazolam) drugs used in combination with fentanyl.

OBJECTIVES

To compare outcomes between a combination of fentanyl and propofol with fentanyl and midazolam in patients during and after PSA.

METHODOLOGY

A randomised single blinded control trial carried out in the ED of a university hospital. 40 patients were randomly allocated equally into two groups: group A, 20 subjects received intravenous fentanyl 3 μg/kg as a bolus dose and a titration maximum bolus dose of propofol 1 mg/kg followed by a maximum titration top-up of 0.5 mg/kg if needed; group B, 20 subjects received intravenous fentanyl 3 μg/kg as a bolus dose and a titration maximum bolus dose of midazolam 0.1 mg/kg and a maximum titration top-up of 0.1 mg/kg if needed. The target sedation level was a Ramsay score of 3 or 4. Outcomes included the presence of any adverse events related to PSA and time to discharge. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the two groups.

RESULTS

None of the patients developed any significant adverse events during and after procedures. The mean length of stay in the propofol and midazolam groups was 29.25 (11.03) and 71.75 (60.64) min, respectively (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Both propofol and midazolam given at the recommended doses were equally safe and effective for PSA in the ED. The propofol group was discharged much earlier than to the midazolam group.

摘要

简介

本研究旨在确定丙泊酚作为急诊(ED)程序镇静和镇痛(PSA)替代药物的有效性,并比较两种不同镇静药物(丙泊酚与咪达唑仑)联合芬太尼的效果。

目的

比较 PSA 期间和之后芬太尼和丙泊酚与芬太尼和咪达唑仑联合使用的两种不同药物的结果。

方法

在一家大学医院的 ED 进行了一项随机、单盲对照试验。将 40 名患者随机平均分配到两组:A 组 20 名患者接受静脉注射芬太尼 3μg/kg 作为推注剂量,然后以 1mg/kg 的丙泊酚滴定最大推注剂量,如果需要,再以 0.5mg/kg 的丙泊酚滴定最大追加剂量;B 组 20 名患者接受静脉注射芬太尼 3μg/kg 作为推注剂量,然后以 0.1mg/kg 的咪达唑仑滴定最大推注剂量,如果需要,再以 0.1mg/kg 的咪达唑仑滴定最大追加剂量。目标镇静水平为 Ramsay 评分 3 或 4 分。结果包括与 PSA 相关的任何不良事件的发生情况和出院时间。使用 Mann-Whitney U 检验比较两组。

结果

两组患者在操作过程中和操作后均未发生任何明显的不良事件。丙泊酚组和咪达唑仑组的平均住院时间分别为 29.25(11.03)和 71.75(60.64)分钟(p<0.001)。

结论

在 ED 中,以推荐剂量给予丙泊酚和咪达唑仑进行 PSA 同样安全有效。丙泊酚组的出院时间明显早于咪达唑仑组。

相似文献

1
The use of propofol for procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department: a comparison with midazolam.在急诊科使用异丙酚进行程序镇静和镇痛:与咪达唑仑的比较。
Emerg Med J. 2011 Oct;28(10):861-5. doi: 10.1136/emj.2009.085019. Epub 2010 Nov 23.
2
Ketamine/propofol versus midazolam/fentanyl for procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department: a randomized, prospective, double-blind trial.氯胺酮/异丙酚与咪达唑仑/芬太尼在急诊科镇静和镇痛中的应用:一项随机、前瞻性、双盲试验。
Acad Emerg Med. 2011 Aug;18(8):800-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01133.x.
3
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.
4
Comparison of the effect of protocol-directed sedation with propofol vs. midazolam by nurses in intensive care: efficacy, haemodynamic stability and patient satisfaction.重症监护病房护士使用丙泊酚与咪达唑仑进行方案导向镇静的效果比较:疗效、血流动力学稳定性及患者满意度
J Clin Nurs. 2008 Jun;17(11):1510-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2007.02128.x.
5
Comparison of propofol with pentobarbital/midazolam/fentanyl sedation for magnetic resonance imaging of the brain in children.丙泊酚与戊巴比妥/咪达唑仑/芬太尼用于儿童脑部磁共振成像镇静的比较。
Pediatrics. 2007 Sep;120(3):e629-36. doi: 10.1542/peds.2006-3108. Epub 2007 Aug 14.
6
Safe and efficacious use of procedural sedation and analgesia by nonanesthesiologists in a pediatric emergency department.非麻醉医生在儿科急诊科安全有效地使用程序性镇静和镇痛。
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003 Nov;157(11):1090-6. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.157.11.1090.
7
Patient-controlled sedation for colonoscopy: a randomized trial comparing patient-controlled administration of propofol and alfentanil with physician-administered midazolam and pethidine.结肠镜检查的患者自控镇静:一项随机试验,比较丙泊酚和阿芬太尼的患者自控给药与医生给予的咪达唑仑和哌替啶。
Endoscopy. 2003 Aug;35(8):683-7. doi: 10.1055/s-2003-41519.
8
Cost-effectiveness analysis of sedation and analgesia regimens during fracture manipulation in the pediatric emergency department.小儿急诊科骨折整复期间镇静和镇痛方案的成本效益分析
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2006 Oct;22(10):729-36. doi: 10.1097/01.pec.0000220523.01364.ef.
9
Efficiency of propofol versus midazolam and fentanyl sedation at a pediatric teaching hospital: a prospective study.小儿教学医院中丙泊酚与咪达唑仑和芬太尼镇静效果的比较:一项前瞻性研究。
Gastrointest Endosc. 2008 Jun;67(7):1067-75. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2007.11.038. Epub 2008 Mar 26.
10
Subdissociative-dose ketamine versus fentanyl for analgesia during propofol procedural sedation: a randomized clinical trial.亚解离剂量氯胺酮与芬太尼用于丙泊酚程序性镇静期间镇痛的随机临床试验
Acad Emerg Med. 2008 Oct;15(10):877-86. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.00219.x. Epub 2008 Aug 27.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison of the Sedation Quality of Etomidate, Propofol, and Midazolam in Combination with Fentanyl During Phacoemulsification Cataract Surgery: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Controlled, Clinical Trial.依托咪酯、丙泊酚和咪达唑仑联合芬太尼在白内障超声乳化手术中的镇静质量比较:一项双盲、随机、对照临床试验
Anesth Pain Med. 2019 Apr 27;9(2):e87415. doi: 10.5812/aapm.87415. eCollection 2019 Apr.
2
Emergency department procedural sedation for primary electrical cardioversion - a comparison with procedural sedations for other reasons.用于首次电复律的急诊科程序性镇静——与其他原因导致的程序性镇静的比较。
World J Emerg Med. 2017;8(3):165-169. doi: 10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2017.03.001.
3
Procedural sedation in the emergency department by Dutch emergency physicians: a prospective multicentre observational study of 1711 adults.
荷兰急诊科医生实施的急诊程序镇静:一项针对1711名成年人的前瞻性多中心观察性研究。
Emerg Med J. 2017 Apr;34(4):237-242. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2016-205767. Epub 2016 Oct 21.
4
Effect of sedation on pain perception.镇静对疼痛感知的影响。
Anesthesiology. 2013 Mar;118(3):611-21. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318281592d.