Smith M, Gray B M, Ingram S, Jewkes D A
National Hospitals for Nervous Diseases, Queen Square, London.
Br J Anaesth. 1990 Aug;65(2):240-2. doi: 10.1093/bja/65.2.240.
In a double-blind, double-dummy study, the efficacy of topical 5% EMLA cream was compared with that of lignocaine infiltration in alleviating the pain of arterial cannulation. Forty unpremedicated adults were allocated randomly to four groups to receive EMLA cream alone, EMLA and 0.9% saline infiltration, EMLA and 1% lignocaine infiltration or placebo cream and 1% lignocaine infiltration. Following arterial cannulation, pain was assessed by the patient using a visual analogue score and by an independent observer using a four-category verbal rating score. Significantly lower pain scores were observed in all patients receiving EMLA compared with those receiving placebo cream and lignocaine infiltration by both patient (P less than 0.01) and observer (P less than 0.001) assessments. There were no significant differences between the three EMLA groups.
在一项双盲、双模拟研究中，对局部应用5%复方利多卡因乳膏与利多卡因浸润在减轻动脉插管疼痛方面的疗效进行了比较。40名未接受术前用药的成年人被随机分为四组，分别接受单纯复方利多卡因乳膏、复方利多卡因乳膏与0.9%生理盐水浸润、复方利多卡因乳膏与1%利多卡因浸润或安慰剂乳膏与1%利多卡因浸润。动脉插管后，由患者使用视觉模拟评分法以及由一名独立观察者使用四类语言评定评分法对疼痛进行评估。通过患者（P<0.01）和观察者（P<0.001）评估发现，与接受安慰剂乳膏和利多卡因浸润的患者相比，所有接受复方利多卡因乳膏的患者的疼痛评分显著更低。三个复方利多卡因乳膏组之间无显著差异。
