The Effectiveness of Intravenous lidocaine in Burn Pain Relief: A Randomized Double-Blind Controlled Trial

IF 0.2 Q4 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
M. Haghighi, Bahram Naderi Nabi, H. Khoshrang, S. Rimaz, Soudabeh Haddadi, A. Parvizi, M. Mobayen, Gelareh Biazar, Tayebeh Zarei
{"title":"The Effectiveness of Intravenous lidocaine in Burn Pain Relief: A Randomized Double-Blind Controlled Trial","authors":"M. Haghighi, Bahram Naderi Nabi, H. Khoshrang, S. Rimaz, Soudabeh Haddadi, A. Parvizi, M. Mobayen, Gelareh Biazar, Tayebeh Zarei","doi":"10.34172/cjmb.2023.18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Poor pain control in burn patients as a great public health problem disrupts the healing and rehabilitation process and results in several adverse outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine in reducing the pain of burn injuries. Materials and Methods: From August 2014 to March 2015, 66 eligible burn patients participated in the study and were randomly divided into two groups of lidocaine (L) and placebo (P). In group L, lidocaine 2% was injected at a bolus dose of 1.5 mg/kg followed by infusion at the dosage of 1.5 mg/kg/h, and in group P, saline was administrated. Pain severity was measured during 24 hours at baseline and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24 hours after intervention based on Numerical Rating Scale (NRS-11). Morphine consumption, Ramsay score, and side effects were also documented. Results: Finally the data from 60 patients were analyzed. Comparing baseline with 24 hours after intervention, NRS-11 scores decreased from 7.12±1.42 to 3.33±0.76 (P<0.001) in group P and from 6.45±1.02 to 2.50±0.72 (P<0.001) in group L. Moreover, the mean of NRS scores during 24 hours in the lidocaine group was significantly lower compared to the placebo group, 3.93±0.72 vs 4.73 ±1.14, (P=0.03). The mean amounts of morphine consumption in group L were significantly lower compared to group P, 14.41 ± 4.86 vs 21.07±6.86, (P=0.001). The mean of Ramsay score in group L was significantly lower compared to group P, 1.38±0.59 vs 1.45±0.6, (P=0.014). Conclusions: This study revealed that intravenous lidocaine was an effective and safe drug for pain reduction in burn patients.","PeriodicalId":43540,"journal":{"name":"Crescent Journal of Medical and Biological Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Crescent Journal of Medical and Biological Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/cjmb.2023.18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Poor pain control in burn patients as a great public health problem disrupts the healing and rehabilitation process and results in several adverse outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine in reducing the pain of burn injuries. Materials and Methods: From August 2014 to March 2015, 66 eligible burn patients participated in the study and were randomly divided into two groups of lidocaine (L) and placebo (P). In group L, lidocaine 2% was injected at a bolus dose of 1.5 mg/kg followed by infusion at the dosage of 1.5 mg/kg/h, and in group P, saline was administrated. Pain severity was measured during 24 hours at baseline and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24 hours after intervention based on Numerical Rating Scale (NRS-11). Morphine consumption, Ramsay score, and side effects were also documented. Results: Finally the data from 60 patients were analyzed. Comparing baseline with 24 hours after intervention, NRS-11 scores decreased from 7.12±1.42 to 3.33±0.76 (P<0.001) in group P and from 6.45±1.02 to 2.50±0.72 (P<0.001) in group L. Moreover, the mean of NRS scores during 24 hours in the lidocaine group was significantly lower compared to the placebo group, 3.93±0.72 vs 4.73 ±1.14, (P=0.03). The mean amounts of morphine consumption in group L were significantly lower compared to group P, 14.41 ± 4.86 vs 21.07±6.86, (P=0.001). The mean of Ramsay score in group L was significantly lower compared to group P, 1.38±0.59 vs 1.45±0.6, (P=0.014). Conclusions: This study revealed that intravenous lidocaine was an effective and safe drug for pain reduction in burn patients.
静脉注射利多卡因缓解烧伤疼痛的疗效:一项随机双盲对照试验
目的:烧伤患者的疼痛控制不力是一个严重的公共卫生问题,会扰乱愈合和康复过程,并导致一些不良后果。本研究的目的是研究静脉注射利多卡因减轻烧伤疼痛的有效性和安全性。材料与方法:从2014年8月至2015年3月,66名符合条件的烧伤患者参加了本研究,并被随机分为利多卡因(L)和安慰剂(P)两组。在L组中,2%利多卡因以1.5mg/kg的单次剂量注射,然后以1.5mg/kg/h的剂量输注,在P组中,给予生理盐水。根据数值评定量表(NRS-11),在基线24小时和干预后1、2、4、8、12、16、20、24小时测量疼痛严重程度。吗啡消耗量、拉姆齐评分和副作用也被记录在案。结果:对60例患者的临床资料进行分析。与基线和干预后24小时相比,P组NRS-11评分从7.12±1.42降至3.33±0.76(P<0.001),L组从6.45±1.02降至2.50±0.72(P<0.01)。此外,利多卡因组24小时内NRS评分的平均值显著低于安慰剂组,分别为3.93±0.72和4.73±1.14,(P=0.03)。与P组相比,L组的吗啡平均消耗量显著降低,分别为14.41±4.86和21.07±6.86(P=0.001)。L组的Ramsay评分平均值显著低于P组,分别为1.38±0.59和1.45±0.6(P=0.014)。
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
25.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: All kind of knowledge contributing to the development of science by its content, value, level and originality will be covered by CJMB. Problems of public health and their solutions are at the head of the windows opening us to the world. The "Crescent Journal of Medical and Biological Sciences" is a modern forum for scientific communication,coveringall aspects medical sciences and biological sciences, in basic and clinical sciences, mainly including: • Anatomy • Antioxidant Therapy in Reproduction Medicine • Biochemistry • Biophysics • Breast Cancer • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine • Cell Biology • Dentistry sciences • Diabetes • Embryology • Endocrinology • Genetics • Hematology • Herbal Medicine • Histology • Internal Medicine • Internal Medicine, surgery • Medical Education • Medical Laboratory Sciences • Medical Microbiology • Microbiology • Mycology, Neurosciences • Nerosciences • Nutrition • Oncology • Parasitology • Pathology • Pharmacognosy • Pharmacology • Psychiatry • Sex-Based Biology • Sports Medicine • Urogynecology • Virology
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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