Suppr超能文献

静脉注射利多卡因用于急诊科治疗急性根性腰痛的随机对照试验。

Intravenous lidocaine for the emergency department treatment of acute radicular low back pain, a randomized controlled trial.

作者信息

Tanen David A, Shimada Mai, Danish D Chris, Dos Santos Frank, Makela Martin, Riffenburgh Robert H

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, California.

University of Tokyo Medical School, Tokyo, Japan.

出版信息

J Emerg Med. 2014 Jul;47(1):119-24. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2012.12.014. Epub 2014 Apr 24.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Acute radicular back pain is a frequent complaint of patients presenting to the Emergency Department.

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Determine the efficacy of intravenous lidocaine when compared to ketorolac for the treatment of acute radicular low back pain.

METHODS

Randomized double-blind study of 41 patients aged 18-55 years presenting with acute radicular low back pain. Patients were randomized to receive either 100 mg lidocaine or 30 mg ketorolac intravenously over 2 min. A 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) was used to assess pain at Time 0 (baseline), and 20, 40, and 60 minutes. Changes in [median] VAS scores were compared over time (within groups) by the signed-rank test and between groups by the rank-sum test. A 5-point Pain Relief Scale (PRS) was administered at the conclusion of the study (60 min) and again at 1 week by telephone follow-up; [median] scores were compared between groups by rank-sum.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients were recruited; 41 completed the study (21 lidocaine, 20 ketorolac). Initial VAS scores were not significantly different between the lidocaine and ketorolac groups (83; 95% confidence interval [CI] 74-98 vs. 79; 95% CI 64-94; p = 0.278). Median VAS scores from baseline to 60 min significantly declined in both groups (lidocaine [8; 95% CI 0-23; p = 0.003]; ketorolac [14; 95% CI 0-28; p = 0.007]), with no significant difference in the degree of reduction between groups (p = 0.835). Rescue medication was required by 67% receiving lidocaine, compared to 50% receiving ketorolac. No significant change in PRS between groups was found at the conclusion or at the follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous lidocaine failed to clinically alleviate the pain associated with acute radicular low back pain.

摘要

背景

急性根性背痛是急诊科患者的常见主诉。

研究目的

确定与酮咯酸相比,静脉注射利多卡因治疗急性根性下腰痛的疗效。

方法

对41例年龄在18 - 55岁、患有急性根性下腰痛的患者进行随机双盲研究。患者被随机分为两组,分别在2分钟内静脉注射100毫克利多卡因或30毫克酮咯酸。使用100毫米视觉模拟量表(VAS)在时间0(基线)、20、40和60分钟时评估疼痛程度。通过符号秩检验比较两组内VAS评分随时间的变化,通过秩和检验比较两组间的变化。在研究结束时(60分钟)以及1周后通过电话随访使用5分疼痛缓解量表(PRS);通过秩和检验比较两组间的[中位数]评分。

结果

招募了44例患者;41例完成研究(21例使用利多卡因,20例使用酮咯酸)。利多卡因组和酮咯酸组的初始VAS评分无显著差异(83;95%置信区间[CI] 74 - 98 vs. 79;95% CI 64 - 94;p = 0.278)。两组从基线到60分钟的VAS中位数评分均显著下降(利多卡因组[8;95% CI 0 - 23;p = 0.003];酮咯酸组[14;95% CI 0 - 28;p = 0.007]),两组间下降程度无显著差异(p = 0.835)。接受利多卡因治疗的患者中有67%需要使用急救药物,而接受酮咯酸治疗的患者中这一比例为50%。在研究结束时和随访时,两组间的PRS均无显著变化。

结论

静脉注射利多卡因未能在临床上缓解与急性根性下腰痛相关的疼痛。

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