Suppr超能文献

脊柱融合手术后两种静脉自控镇痛模式的比较:恒速背景输注与变速反馈输注,一项随机对照试验。

A comparison of 2 intravenous patient-controlled analgesia modes after spinal fusion surgery: Constant-rate background infusion versus variable-rate feedback infusion, a randomized controlled trial.

作者信息

Lee Seung Hyuk, Baek Chong Wha, Kang Hyun, Park Yong-Hee, Choi Geun Joo, Jung Yong Hun, Woo Young Cheol

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Chung-Ang University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Mar;98(10):e14753. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000014753.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Conventional intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), which usually involves constant-rate background infusion plus demand dosing, may cause adverse effects or insufficient analgesia. When variable-rate feedback infusion plus demand dosing mode is used, the infusion rate can be changed according to the patient's needs.

METHODS

In this prospective randomized double-blind study, 78 adults who were undergoing spinal fusion surgery were randomly allocated to either the constant-rate background infusion plus demand dosing group (group C) or the variable-rate feedback infusion plus demand dosing group (group V). The number of demands, volume delivered, numerical rating scale (NRS) score, adverse effects and the use of rescue analgesics were examined at 30 minutes after the operation in the post-anesthesia care unit, and at 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours.

RESULTS

The number of demands was significantly lower in group V than in group C at 12-24 hours (4.59 ± 4.31 vs 9.21 ± 6.79 times, P = .001) and over the total period. The volume delivered via PCA was significantly lower in group V than in group C at 12 to 24 hours (13.96 ± 13.45 vs 21.19 ± 8.66 mL, P = .006), 24 to 48 hours (13.39 ± 12.44 vs 33.6 ± 12.49 mL, P = .000), and over the total period. NRS scores, administration of rescue analgesics, and postoperative nausea and vomiting showed no between-group differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Variable-rate feedback infusion plus the demand dosing mode can control postoperative pain more efficiently, with lower dosages of analgesics, than constant-rate background infusion plus demand dosing in patients who undergo spinal fusion surgery.

摘要

背景

传统的静脉自控镇痛(PCA)通常包括恒速背景输注加按需给药,可能会引起不良反应或镇痛不足。当采用可变速率反馈输注加按需给药模式时,输注速率可根据患者需求进行调整。

方法

在这项前瞻性随机双盲研究中,78例接受脊柱融合手术的成人被随机分为恒速背景输注加按需给药组(C组)或可变速率反馈输注加按需给药组(V组)。在麻醉后护理单元术后30分钟以及术后6、12、24和48小时,检查需求次数、输注量、数字评分量表(NRS)评分、不良反应以及急救镇痛药的使用情况。

结果

在12至24小时(4.59±4.31次对9.21±6.79次,P = 0.001)以及整个时间段内,V组的需求次数显著低于C组。在12至24小时(13.96±13.45对21.19±8.66 mL,P = 0.006)、24至48小时(13.39±12.44对33.6±12.49 mL,P = 0.000)以及整个时间段内,V组通过PCA输注的量显著低于C组。NRS评分、急救镇痛药的使用以及术后恶心呕吐在两组之间无差异。

结论

对于接受脊柱融合手术的患者,与恒速背景输注加按需给药相比,可变速率反馈输注加按需给药模式能更有效地控制术后疼痛,且镇痛药用量更低。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7e77/6417619/5327b2c2f87a/medi-98-e14753-g001.jpg

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