Effect of Using Midazolam and Propofol in Low Doses for Intraoperative Nausea and Vomiting Prevention in Pregnant Women Underwent Cesarean Section under Regional Anesthesia

IF 0.1 4区 医学 Q4 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Zainab Faisal Habasha
{"title":"Effect of Using Midazolam and Propofol in Low Doses for Intraoperative Nausea and Vomiting Prevention in Pregnant Women Underwent Cesarean Section under Regional Anesthesia","authors":"Zainab Faisal Habasha","doi":"10.9734/ajmah/2023/v21i10872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: To investigate if and how severe intraoperative nausea and vomiting occur following elective cesarean sections performed under spinal anesthesia using sub-hypnotic dosages of midazolam and propofol. \nStudy Design: Clinical trial. \nMethodology:  The current study was conducted at the Gynecology and Obstetrics Department of a Teaching Hospital in Baghdad, Iraq. The study included 90 full-term pregnant women with single viable fetuses who underwent elective C/S by spinal anesthesia and were randomly assigned to one of three groups: group A included 30 women who received propofol, group B included 30 women who received midazolam, and Group C included 30 women who received placebo. The Bellville scoring score was used to assess nausea and vomiting. The Richmond Agitation Sedation Score (RASS) was used to assess sedation intraoperatively. \nResults: Patients in group C had the highest prevalence of nausea and vomiting (56.7%), which was significantly different from groups A (16.7%, P=0.001) and B (13.3%, P=0.001); however, there was no statistically significant difference between groups A and B (P= 0.717). The group B patients had the highest prevalence of drowsiness (20%), which was substantially different from group C (3.3%, P=0.044), whereas there were no statistically significant differences between groups A and B (P= 0.278) or A and C (P= 0.3). \nConclusion: Low doses of midazolam or propofol administered after cesarean section (after the umbilical cord has been clamped) can lessen intraoperative nausea and vomiting without significantly lowering blood pressure or heart rate, with midazolam being more effective than propofol in this regard.","PeriodicalId":49491,"journal":{"name":"Southeast Asian Journal of Tropical Medicine and Public Health","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southeast Asian Journal of Tropical Medicine and Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9734/ajmah/2023/v21i10872","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To investigate if and how severe intraoperative nausea and vomiting occur following elective cesarean sections performed under spinal anesthesia using sub-hypnotic dosages of midazolam and propofol. Study Design: Clinical trial. Methodology:  The current study was conducted at the Gynecology and Obstetrics Department of a Teaching Hospital in Baghdad, Iraq. The study included 90 full-term pregnant women with single viable fetuses who underwent elective C/S by spinal anesthesia and were randomly assigned to one of three groups: group A included 30 women who received propofol, group B included 30 women who received midazolam, and Group C included 30 women who received placebo. The Bellville scoring score was used to assess nausea and vomiting. The Richmond Agitation Sedation Score (RASS) was used to assess sedation intraoperatively. Results: Patients in group C had the highest prevalence of nausea and vomiting (56.7%), which was significantly different from groups A (16.7%, P=0.001) and B (13.3%, P=0.001); however, there was no statistically significant difference between groups A and B (P= 0.717). The group B patients had the highest prevalence of drowsiness (20%), which was substantially different from group C (3.3%, P=0.044), whereas there were no statistically significant differences between groups A and B (P= 0.278) or A and C (P= 0.3). Conclusion: Low doses of midazolam or propofol administered after cesarean section (after the umbilical cord has been clamped) can lessen intraoperative nausea and vomiting without significantly lowering blood pressure or heart rate, with midazolam being more effective than propofol in this regard.
低剂量咪达唑仑与异丙酚预防剖宫产术中恶心呕吐的效果
目的:探讨腰麻下咪达唑仑和异丙酚亚催眠剂量下择期剖宫产术中是否以及如何发生严重术中恶心和呕吐。研究设计:临床试验。方法:目前的研究是在伊拉克巴格达一家教学医院的妇产科进行的。该研究包括90名通过脊髓麻醉进行选择性C/S的单活胎足月孕妇,随机分为三组:A组有30名接受异丙酚的妇女,B组有30名接受咪达唑仑的妇女,C组有30名接受安慰剂的妇女。使用Bellville评分来评估恶心和呕吐。采用Richmond躁动镇静评分(RASS)评价术中镇静作用。结果:C组患者恶心呕吐发生率最高(56.7%),显著高于A组(16.7%,P=0.001)和B组(13.3%,P=0.001);A组与B组比较差异无统计学意义(P= 0.717)。B组患者嗜睡发生率最高(20%),与C组(3.3%,P=0.044)差异有统计学意义,而A组与B组(P= 0.278)、A组与C组(P= 0.3)差异无统计学意义。结论:剖宫产术后(钳住脐带后)给予低剂量咪达唑仑或异丙酚可减轻术中恶心呕吐,但不会显著降低血压和心率,在这方面咪达唑仑比异丙酚更有效。
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
Southeast Asian Journal of Tropical Medicine and Public Health
Southeast Asian Journal of Tropical Medicine and Public Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-INFECTIOUS DISEASES
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The SEAMEO* Regional Tropical Medicine and Public Health Project was established in 1967 to help improve the health and standard of living of the peoples of Southeast Asia by pooling manpower resources of the participating SEAMEO member countries in a cooperative endeavor to develop and upgrade the research and training capabilities of the existing facilities in these countries. By promoting effective regional cooperation among the participating national centers, it is hoped to minimize waste in duplication of programs and activities. In 1992 the Project was renamed the SEAMEO Regional Tropical Medicine and Public Health Network.
×
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