将活性炭与可乐混合能提高耐受性而不影响药代动力学吗?随机对照交叉试验。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Michael Keenan MD, Susan Wojcik PhD, Brian M. Clemency DO, Jeanna Marraffa PharmD
{"title":"将活性炭与可乐混合能提高耐受性而不影响药代动力学吗?随机对照交叉试验。","authors":"Michael Keenan MD,&nbsp;Susan Wojcik PhD,&nbsp;Brian M. Clemency DO,&nbsp;Jeanna Marraffa PharmD","doi":"10.1016/j.jen.2024.03.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Activated charcoal is the most common form of gastrointestinal decontamination used for the poisoned patient. One limitation to its use is patient tolerability due to palatability. Some recommend mixing activated charcoal with cola to improve palatability. An important question is whether mixing activated charcoal with cola affects the ability of the activated charcoal to adsorb xenobiotic.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This was a prospective randomized controlled crossover trial. Five healthy adults aged 18 to 40 years were recruited. Participants received 45 mg/kg acetaminophen rounded down to the nearest whole tablet. One hour later, they were randomized to receive 50 g of an activated charcoal-water premixture alone or mixed with cola. Acetaminophen levels were collected. The area under the curve of acetaminophen concentrations over time was measured as a marker for degree of absorption. Participants also completed an appeal questionnaire in which they rated the activated charcoal preparations. Participants would then return after at least 7 days to repeat the study with the other activated charcoal preparation.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Four male participants and 1 female participant were recruited. There was no statistical difference in preference score for activated charcoal alone versus the cola-activated charcoal mixture. There was no statistical difference in the area under the curve of acetaminophen concentrations over time between activated charcoal alone and the cola-activated charcoal mixture. Of note, the study is limited by the small sample size, limiting its statistical power.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>The absorption of acetaminophen in an overdose model is no different when participants received activated charcoal alone or a cola-activated charcoal mixture as suggested by area under the curve. In this small study, there was no difference in preference for activated charcoal alone or a cola-activated charcoal mixture across a range of palatability questions. On an individual level, some participants preferred the activated charcoal-cola mixture, and some preferred the activated charcoal alone.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51082,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Emergency Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does Mixing Activated Charcoal With Cola Improve Tolerability Without Affecting Pharmacokinetics? A Randomized Controlled Crossover Trial\",\"authors\":\"Michael Keenan MD,&nbsp;Susan Wojcik PhD,&nbsp;Brian M. Clemency DO,&nbsp;Jeanna Marraffa PharmD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jen.2024.03.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Activated charcoal is the most common form of gastrointestinal decontamination used for the poisoned patient. One limitation to its use is patient tolerability due to palatability. Some recommend mixing activated charcoal with cola to improve palatability. An important question is whether mixing activated charcoal with cola affects the ability of the activated charcoal to adsorb xenobiotic.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This was a prospective randomized controlled crossover trial. Five healthy adults aged 18 to 40 years were recruited. Participants received 45 mg/kg acetaminophen rounded down to the nearest whole tablet. One hour later, they were randomized to receive 50 g of an activated charcoal-water premixture alone or mixed with cola. Acetaminophen levels were collected. The area under the curve of acetaminophen concentrations over time was measured as a marker for degree of absorption. Participants also completed an appeal questionnaire in which they rated the activated charcoal preparations. Participants would then return after at least 7 days to repeat the study with the other activated charcoal preparation.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Four male participants and 1 female participant were recruited. There was no statistical difference in preference score for activated charcoal alone versus the cola-activated charcoal mixture. There was no statistical difference in the area under the curve of acetaminophen concentrations over time between activated charcoal alone and the cola-activated charcoal mixture. Of note, the study is limited by the small sample size, limiting its statistical power.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>The absorption of acetaminophen in an overdose model is no different when participants received activated charcoal alone or a cola-activated charcoal mixture as suggested by area under the curve. In this small study, there was no difference in preference for activated charcoal alone or a cola-activated charcoal mixture across a range of palatability questions. On an individual level, some participants preferred the activated charcoal-cola mixture, and some preferred the activated charcoal alone.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51082,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Emergency Nursing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Emergency Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099176724000771\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Emergency Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099176724000771","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:活性炭是中毒患者最常用的胃肠道净化方式。使用活性炭的一个限制因素是患者对其适口性的耐受性。有些人建议将活性炭与可乐混合,以改善其适口性。一个重要的问题是,将活性炭与可乐混合是否会影响活性炭吸附异生物的能力。试验招募了五名 18 至 40 岁的健康成年人。参与者服用 45 毫克/千克对乙酰氨基酚(四舍五入至最接近的整片)。一小时后,他们随机接受 50 克活性炭-水预混物单独饮用或与可乐混合饮用。收集对乙酰氨基酚的含量。测量对乙酰氨基酚浓度随时间变化的曲线下面积,作为吸收程度的标志。参与者还填写了一份申诉问卷,对活性炭制剂进行评分。然后,参与者将在至少 7 天后返回,用另一种活性炭制剂重复研究。单纯活性炭与可乐活性炭混合物的偏好得分没有统计学差异。单纯活性炭与可乐活性炭混合物的对乙酰氨基酚浓度随时间变化的曲线下面积没有统计学差异。讨论正如曲线下面积所显示的那样,在过量用药模型中,服用单独的活性炭或可乐活性炭混合物对对乙酰氨基酚的吸收并无不同。在这项小型研究中,在一系列适口性问题上,参与者对单独使用活性炭或可乐活性炭混合物的偏好没有差异。就个体而言,有些参与者更喜欢活性炭-可乐混合物,有些则更喜欢单独的活性炭。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does Mixing Activated Charcoal With Cola Improve Tolerability Without Affecting Pharmacokinetics? A Randomized Controlled Crossover Trial

Introduction

Activated charcoal is the most common form of gastrointestinal decontamination used for the poisoned patient. One limitation to its use is patient tolerability due to palatability. Some recommend mixing activated charcoal with cola to improve palatability. An important question is whether mixing activated charcoal with cola affects the ability of the activated charcoal to adsorb xenobiotic.

Methods

This was a prospective randomized controlled crossover trial. Five healthy adults aged 18 to 40 years were recruited. Participants received 45 mg/kg acetaminophen rounded down to the nearest whole tablet. One hour later, they were randomized to receive 50 g of an activated charcoal-water premixture alone or mixed with cola. Acetaminophen levels were collected. The area under the curve of acetaminophen concentrations over time was measured as a marker for degree of absorption. Participants also completed an appeal questionnaire in which they rated the activated charcoal preparations. Participants would then return after at least 7 days to repeat the study with the other activated charcoal preparation.

Results

Four male participants and 1 female participant were recruited. There was no statistical difference in preference score for activated charcoal alone versus the cola-activated charcoal mixture. There was no statistical difference in the area under the curve of acetaminophen concentrations over time between activated charcoal alone and the cola-activated charcoal mixture. Of note, the study is limited by the small sample size, limiting its statistical power.

Discussion

The absorption of acetaminophen in an overdose model is no different when participants received activated charcoal alone or a cola-activated charcoal mixture as suggested by area under the curve. In this small study, there was no difference in preference for activated charcoal alone or a cola-activated charcoal mixture across a range of palatability questions. On an individual level, some participants preferred the activated charcoal-cola mixture, and some preferred the activated charcoal alone.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
11.80%
发文量
132
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Emergency Nursing, the official journal of the Emergency Nurses Association (ENA), is committed to the dissemination of high quality, peer-reviewed manuscripts relevant to all areas of emergency nursing practice across the lifespan. Journal content includes clinical topics, integrative or systematic literature reviews, research, and practice improvement initiatives that provide emergency nurses globally with implications for translation of new knowledge into practice. The Journal also includes focused sections such as case studies, pharmacology/toxicology, injury prevention, trauma, triage, quality and safety, pediatrics and geriatrics. The Journal aims to mirror the goal of ENA to promote: community, governance and leadership, knowledge, quality and safety, and advocacy.
×
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