Post OP Analgesic Effect of Transabdominal Block in Patients Undergoing Elective Ceaserian Section

Ayesha Saleem, Abdullah Saleem, Waqas Anjum, Yasmeen Azeem, Salma Sadia, Khushboo Chandio
{"title":"Post OP Analgesic Effect of Transabdominal Block in Patients Undergoing Elective Ceaserian Section","authors":"Ayesha Saleem, Abdullah Saleem, Waqas Anjum, Yasmeen Azeem, Salma Sadia, Khushboo Chandio","doi":"10.53350/pjmhs2023176361","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The management of postoperative pain, especially following abdominal surgeries, remains a pivotal challenge in clinical practice. The utilization of a transabdominal plane (TAP) block has recently emerged as a promising technique in achieving effective postoperative pain control. This study aimed to rigorously evaluate the analgesic efficacy of the TAP block in comparison with a control group not receiving the block, employing standardized Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores and additional postoperative analgesic requirements as the primary outcome measures. Methods: A total of 50 patients undergoing abdominal surgery were randomly assigned to two groups: TAP block (n=25) and control (n=25). The TAP group received a specific dose of bupivacaine, while the control group received n/saline. Pain intensity was quantitatively assessed using VAS scores at 2, 6, 12, and 24 hours postoperatively. The requirement for additional postoperative analgesics was also recorded and compared between groups. Results: The TAP block group demonstrated consistently and significantly lower VAS scores across all time intervals measured, with mean differences ranging from 1.7 to 2.7 (p<0.001). Additionally, the TAP block group required additional analgesics in only 20% of cases (95% CI: 7-33%), as opposed to 68% in the control group (95% CI: 49-87%), signifying a significant reduction of 48 percentage points (p<0.01, 95% CI of the difference: 28-68%). Conclusion: The research presented here illustrates the heightened effectiveness of the TAP block in managing pain compared to traditional methods for patients having abdominal surgery. The noteworthy decrease in VAS scores, along with the reduced requirement for extra post-surgery pain relief, highlights the TAP block's potential as an efficient method for controlling pain. Continued investigation is recommended to determine the best techniques and identify the specific patient groups that might gain the most from this innovative method, aiming to improve both comfort and recovery following surgery. Keywords: Elective C-section, VAS score, Abdominal surgery, Effectiveness","PeriodicalId":19842,"journal":{"name":"Pakistan Journal of Medical and Health Sciences","volume":"115 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pakistan Journal of Medical and Health Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53350/pjmhs2023176361","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The management of postoperative pain, especially following abdominal surgeries, remains a pivotal challenge in clinical practice. The utilization of a transabdominal plane (TAP) block has recently emerged as a promising technique in achieving effective postoperative pain control. This study aimed to rigorously evaluate the analgesic efficacy of the TAP block in comparison with a control group not receiving the block, employing standardized Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores and additional postoperative analgesic requirements as the primary outcome measures. Methods: A total of 50 patients undergoing abdominal surgery were randomly assigned to two groups: TAP block (n=25) and control (n=25). The TAP group received a specific dose of bupivacaine, while the control group received n/saline. Pain intensity was quantitatively assessed using VAS scores at 2, 6, 12, and 24 hours postoperatively. The requirement for additional postoperative analgesics was also recorded and compared between groups. Results: The TAP block group demonstrated consistently and significantly lower VAS scores across all time intervals measured, with mean differences ranging from 1.7 to 2.7 (p<0.001). Additionally, the TAP block group required additional analgesics in only 20% of cases (95% CI: 7-33%), as opposed to 68% in the control group (95% CI: 49-87%), signifying a significant reduction of 48 percentage points (p<0.01, 95% CI of the difference: 28-68%). Conclusion: The research presented here illustrates the heightened effectiveness of the TAP block in managing pain compared to traditional methods for patients having abdominal surgery. The noteworthy decrease in VAS scores, along with the reduced requirement for extra post-surgery pain relief, highlights the TAP block's potential as an efficient method for controlling pain. Continued investigation is recommended to determine the best techniques and identify the specific patient groups that might gain the most from this innovative method, aiming to improve both comfort and recovery following surgery. Keywords: Elective C-section, VAS score, Abdominal surgery, Effectiveness
经腹阻滞对选择性剖腹产患者术后的镇痛效果
背景:术后疼痛的处理,尤其是腹部手术后的疼痛处理,仍然是临床实践中的一项关键挑战。最近,经腹平面(TAP)阻滞已成为有效控制术后疼痛的一种有前途的技术。本研究旨在采用标准化视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分和术后额外镇痛需求作为主要结果测量指标,严格评估经腹平面阻滞与未接受经腹平面阻滞的对照组相比的镇痛效果。方法将 50 名接受腹部手术的患者随机分配到两组:TAP阻滞组(25 人)和对照组(25 人)。TAP 组接受特定剂量的布比卡因,而对照组接受 n/saline。在术后 2、6、12 和 24 小时,使用 VAS 评分对疼痛强度进行定量评估。此外,还记录了术后额外镇痛药的需求量,并对各组进行了比较。结果:在所有测量时间间隔内,TAP阻滞组的 VAS 评分均持续显著降低,平均差异在 1.7 到 2.7 之间(p<0.001)。此外,TAP阻滞组仅有 20% 的病例(95% CI:7-33%)需要额外的镇痛剂,而对照组则有 68%(95% CI:49-87%)需要额外的镇痛剂,显著降低了 48 个百分点(P<0.01,95% CI 差异:28-68%)。结论本文介绍的研究表明,与传统方法相比,TAP 阻滞疗法在减轻腹部手术患者疼痛方面效果显著。值得注意的是,VAS 评分的降低以及术后额外止痛需求的减少,凸显了 TAP 阻滞作为一种有效止痛方法的潜力。我们建议继续进行研究,以确定最佳技术,并识别可能从这种创新方法中获益最多的特定患者群体,从而改善手术后的舒适度和恢复情况。关键词择期剖腹产 VAS评分 腹部手术 有效性
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信