{"title":"静脉注射雷莫司琼与地塞米松减轻异丙酚静脉注射疼痛的对照研究","authors":"S. Nayek, Chaitali Biswas","doi":"10.32677/EJMS.2019.V04.I02.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Propofol as an induction agent has disadvantage of pain on intravenous injection (IV). Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of ramosetron and dexamethasone as a pretreatment drug for attenuation of pain due to propofol injection. Methods: This randomized comparative study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in Eastern India, over a period of one year (March 2016-February 2017). Total 90 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade I and II patients were randomly assigned into three groups (30 in each). Group R received 2 ml (0.3mg) of ramosetron, Group D received 2 ml (0.1mg/kg) of dexamethasone, and Group N received 2 ml of 0.9% normal saline. Venous drainage was occluded by using a tourniquet in mid-forearm before injecting the pre-treatment solution and released after 1 min and then 2 ml of propofol was injected over 5 sec. Patients were observed and questioned 15 sec later, if they had pain in the arm or discomfort during drug injection. The pain was scored on a four-point scale: 0 = no pain, 1 = mild pain, 2 = moderate pain, and 3 = severe pain. Pearson’s Chi Square test/Fisher's Exact Test and Mann-Whitney U test/Kruskal Wallis Test were used to analyze the results. Results: The overall incidence of pain was 90% in the saline group, 17% in the ramosetron group and 10% in the dexamethasone group. The intensity of pain was significantly less in patients receiving ramosetron and dexamethasone than those receiving saline (P < 0.05). Haemodynamic parameters like heart rate (HR) and mean blood pressure (MBP) were recorded at different points of time. No significant inter group differences in MBP and HR were noted at any point of time. Conclusion: Pre-treatment with intravenous ramosetron and dexamethasone both lead to relief of pain on injection of IV propofol without any significant difference between their effects.","PeriodicalId":386906,"journal":{"name":"Volume 4 Issue 2 Apr - Jun 2019","volume":"103 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN INTRAVENOUS RAMOSETRON AND DEXAMETHASONE AS PRE-TREATMENT TO ATTENUATE PAIN DURING INTRAVENOUS PROPOFOL INJECTION\",\"authors\":\"S. Nayek, Chaitali Biswas\",\"doi\":\"10.32677/EJMS.2019.V04.I02.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Propofol as an induction agent has disadvantage of pain on intravenous injection (IV). Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of ramosetron and dexamethasone as a pretreatment drug for attenuation of pain due to propofol injection. Methods: This randomized comparative study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in Eastern India, over a period of one year (March 2016-February 2017). Total 90 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade I and II patients were randomly assigned into three groups (30 in each). Group R received 2 ml (0.3mg) of ramosetron, Group D received 2 ml (0.1mg/kg) of dexamethasone, and Group N received 2 ml of 0.9% normal saline. Venous drainage was occluded by using a tourniquet in mid-forearm before injecting the pre-treatment solution and released after 1 min and then 2 ml of propofol was injected over 5 sec. Patients were observed and questioned 15 sec later, if they had pain in the arm or discomfort during drug injection. The pain was scored on a four-point scale: 0 = no pain, 1 = mild pain, 2 = moderate pain, and 3 = severe pain. Pearson’s Chi Square test/Fisher's Exact Test and Mann-Whitney U test/Kruskal Wallis Test were used to analyze the results. Results: The overall incidence of pain was 90% in the saline group, 17% in the ramosetron group and 10% in the dexamethasone group. The intensity of pain was significantly less in patients receiving ramosetron and dexamethasone than those receiving saline (P < 0.05). Haemodynamic parameters like heart rate (HR) and mean blood pressure (MBP) were recorded at different points of time. No significant inter group differences in MBP and HR were noted at any point of time. Conclusion: Pre-treatment with intravenous ramosetron and dexamethasone both lead to relief of pain on injection of IV propofol without any significant difference between their effects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":386906,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Volume 4 Issue 2 Apr - Jun 2019\",\"volume\":\"103 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Volume 4 Issue 2 Apr - Jun 2019\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32677/EJMS.2019.V04.I02.003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volume 4 Issue 2 Apr - Jun 2019","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32677/EJMS.2019.V04.I02.003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:异丙酚作为诱导剂在静脉注射时存在疼痛的缺点。目的:比较雷莫司琼与地塞米松作为预处理药物对异丙酚注射后疼痛的缓解效果。方法:这项随机比较研究在印度东部的一家三级保健医院进行,为期一年(2016年3月- 2017年2月)。90例美国麻醉学会(ASA) I级和II级患者随机分为三组(每组30例)。R组给予雷莫司琼2 ml (0.3mg), D组给予地塞米松2 ml (0.1mg/kg), N组给予0.9%生理盐水2 ml。注射前溶液前在前臂中部用止血带阻断静脉引流,1分钟后释放,5秒内注射异丙酚2ml。15秒后观察询问患者在注射药物时是否有手臂疼痛或不适。疼痛以四分制进行评分:0 =无疼痛,1 =轻度疼痛,2 =中度疼痛,3 =严重疼痛。采用Pearson卡方检验/Fisher精确检验和Mann-Whitney U检验/Kruskal Wallis检验对结果进行分析。结果:生理盐水组疼痛总发生率为90%,雷莫司琼组为17%,地塞米松组为10%。雷莫司琼、地塞米松组疼痛强度明显低于生理盐水组(P < 0.05)。在不同时间点记录心率(HR)、平均血压(MBP)等血流动力学参数。各组间MBP和HR均无显著差异。结论:术前静脉注射雷莫司琼和地塞米松均能缓解静脉注射异丙酚的疼痛,两者的效果无显著差异。
COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN INTRAVENOUS RAMOSETRON AND DEXAMETHASONE AS PRE-TREATMENT TO ATTENUATE PAIN DURING INTRAVENOUS PROPOFOL INJECTION
Background: Propofol as an induction agent has disadvantage of pain on intravenous injection (IV). Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of ramosetron and dexamethasone as a pretreatment drug for attenuation of pain due to propofol injection. Methods: This randomized comparative study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in Eastern India, over a period of one year (March 2016-February 2017). Total 90 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade I and II patients were randomly assigned into three groups (30 in each). Group R received 2 ml (0.3mg) of ramosetron, Group D received 2 ml (0.1mg/kg) of dexamethasone, and Group N received 2 ml of 0.9% normal saline. Venous drainage was occluded by using a tourniquet in mid-forearm before injecting the pre-treatment solution and released after 1 min and then 2 ml of propofol was injected over 5 sec. Patients were observed and questioned 15 sec later, if they had pain in the arm or discomfort during drug injection. The pain was scored on a four-point scale: 0 = no pain, 1 = mild pain, 2 = moderate pain, and 3 = severe pain. Pearson’s Chi Square test/Fisher's Exact Test and Mann-Whitney U test/Kruskal Wallis Test were used to analyze the results. Results: The overall incidence of pain was 90% in the saline group, 17% in the ramosetron group and 10% in the dexamethasone group. The intensity of pain was significantly less in patients receiving ramosetron and dexamethasone than those receiving saline (P < 0.05). Haemodynamic parameters like heart rate (HR) and mean blood pressure (MBP) were recorded at different points of time. No significant inter group differences in MBP and HR were noted at any point of time. Conclusion: Pre-treatment with intravenous ramosetron and dexamethasone both lead to relief of pain on injection of IV propofol without any significant difference between their effects.