Wasiak Jason, Mahar Patrick, McGuinness Siobhan K, Spinks Anneliese, Danilla Stefan, Cleland Heather
Victorian Adult Burns Service and School of Public Health and Preventative Medicine, Monash University, The Alfred Hospital,Melbourne, Australia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jun 13(6):CD005622. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005622.pub3.
This is an update of the review on 'Lidocaine for pain relief in burn injured patients' first published in Issue 3, 2007. Pain is a major issue for patients suffering from many different types of wounds, in particular those with burn injuries. Prompt, aggressive use of opioid analgesics such as morphine has been suggested as critical to avert the cycle of pain and anxiety, but side effects are encountered. It is proposed that newer agents such as lidocaine could be effective in reducing pain and alleviating the escalating opioid dosage requirements in patients with burn injury.
To assess the safety and effectiveness of intravenous lidocaine as a means of pain relief versus no therapy, placebo, other drugs or two or more of the above therapies in combination in patients exposed to burn injury.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2011 week 4) and EMBASE (1980 to 2011 week 17).
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs), published and unpublished, which assessed the efficacy of intravenous lidocaine in varying doses as a single-agent therapy with no therapy, placebo, other analgesics such as opioids, lidocaine plus another drug, or two or more of the above therapies as a means of pain relief in patients exposed to burn injury.
Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the studies identified.
This update identified one new randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial which included 45 participants and compared intravenous lidocaine against placebo as a means of pain relief in those with burns. Subjective pain ratings as measured by the verbal rating scale increased during procedures for both treatment arms, however, the increase was less for the lidocaine treatment arm. There were no significant clinical or statistical differences regarding the effects of lidocaine and placebo on opioid requests and consumption, anxiety or level of satisfaction during a wound care procedure.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: As current clinical evidence is based on only one single RCT as well as case series and reports, intravenous lidocaine must be considered a pharmacological agent under investigation in burns care, the effectiveness of which is yet to be determined with further well-designed and conducted clinical trials.
这是对“利多卡因用于烧伤患者止痛”综述的更新,该综述首次发表于2007年第3期。疼痛是许多不同类型伤口患者面临的主要问题,尤其是烧伤患者。有人提出迅速、积极地使用阿片类镇痛药(如吗啡)对于避免疼痛和焦虑循环至关重要,但会出现副作用。有人认为,利多卡因等新型药物可能有效减轻烧伤患者的疼痛,并减少不断增加的阿片类药物剂量需求。
评估静脉注射利多卡因作为一种止痛方法,与不治疗、安慰剂、其他药物或上述两种或更多种疗法联合使用相比,在烧伤患者中的安全性和有效性。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(《Cochrane图书馆》2011年第2期)、MEDLINE(1966年至2011年4月第4周)和EMBASE(1980年至2011年第17周)。
我们纳入了已发表和未发表的随机对照试验(RCT)和对照临床试验(CCT),这些试验评估了不同剂量静脉注射利多卡因作为单一药物疗法,与不治疗、安慰剂、其他镇痛药(如阿片类药物)、利多卡因加另一种药物,或上述两种或更多种疗法联合使用,作为烧伤患者止痛方法的疗效。
两位综述作者独立提取数据,并评估所纳入研究的偏倚风险。
本次更新确定了一项新的随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、交叉试验,该试验纳入了45名参与者,比较了静脉注射利多卡因与安慰剂作为烧伤患者止痛方法的效果。通过语言评定量表测量的主观疼痛评分在两个治疗组的操作过程中均有所增加,然而,利多卡因治疗组的增加幅度较小。在伤口护理过程中,利多卡因和安慰剂对阿片类药物需求和消耗量、焦虑或满意度的影响在临床或统计学上无显著差异。
由于目前的临床证据仅基于一项RCT以及病例系列和报告,静脉注射利多卡因必须被视为烧伤护理中一种正在研究的药物,其有效性还有待通过进一步精心设计和实施的临床试验来确定。