Suppr超能文献

采用静脉血气代替动脉血气(VEINART)减轻疼痛:一项多中心随机对照试验。

Reducing pain by using venous blood gas instead of arterial blood gas (VEINART): a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

机构信息

Emergency Department, Hôpital Lariboisière, Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris, Paris, France.

Emergency department, Hôpital Louis Mourier, Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris, Colombes, France.

出版信息

Emerg Med J. 2020 Dec;37(12):756-761. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2019-209287. Epub 2020 Aug 5.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Venous sampling for blood gas analysis has been suggested as an alternative to arterial sampling in order to reduce pain. The main objective was to compare pain induced by venous and arterial sampling and to assess whether the type of sampling would affect clinical management or not.

METHODS

We performed an open-label randomised multicentre prospective study in four French EDs during a 4-week period. Non-hypoxaemic adults, whose medical management required blood gas analysis, were randomly allocated using a computer-generated randomisation list stratified by centres with an allocation ratio of 1:1 using random blocks to one of the two arms: venous or arterial sampling. The primary outcome was the maximal pain during sampling, using the visual analogue scale. Secondary outcomes pertained to ease of sampling as rated by the nurse drawing the blood, and physician satisfaction regarding usefulness of biochemical data.

RESULTS

113 patients were included: 55 in the arterial and 58 in the venous sampling group. The mean maximal pain was 40.5 mm±24.9 mm and 22.6 mm±20.2 mm in the arterial group and the venous group, respectively, accounting for a mean difference of 17.9 mm (95% CI 9.6 to 26.3) (p<0.0001). Ease of blood sampling was greater in the venous group as compared with the arterial group (p=0.02). The usefulness of the results, evaluated by the prescriber, did not significantly differ (p=0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Venous blood gas is less painful for patients than ABG in non-hypoxaemic patients. Venous blood gas should replace ABG in this setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03784664.

摘要

简介

为了减轻疼痛,有人建议采用静脉采血进行血气分析,以替代动脉采血。主要目的是比较静脉和动脉采血引起的疼痛,并评估采血方式是否会影响临床处理。

方法

我们在法国的 4 家急诊科进行了一项为期 4 周的开放标签、随机、多中心前瞻性研究。将需要血气分析的非低氧血症成人患者按中心分层,采用计算机生成的随机分配表,以 1:1 的比例,使用随机分组将其随机分配到静脉采血组或动脉采血组。主要结局是使用视觉模拟评分法评估采血过程中的最大疼痛。次要结局包括护士评估的采血难易程度,以及医生对生化数据有用性的满意度。

结果

共纳入 113 例患者:动脉采血组 55 例,静脉采血组 58 例。动脉采血组和静脉采血组的最大疼痛均值分别为 40.5 mm±24.9 mm 和 22.6 mm±20.2 mm,平均差值为 17.9 mm(95%CI 9.6 至 26.3)(p<0.0001)。与动脉采血组相比,静脉采血组的采血更容易(p=0.02)。根据医嘱评估,结果的有用性无显著差异(p=0.25)。

结论

在非低氧血症患者中,静脉血气分析比动脉血气分析引起的疼痛更小。在这种情况下,静脉血气分析应替代动脉血气分析。

临床试验注册号

NCT03784664。

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