髋部骨折患者腹股沟周围神经群阻滞和髂上筋膜室阻滞对动态疼痛的镇痛效果比较:随机对照试验。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Won Uk Koh, Hyungtae Kim, Yeon Ju Kim, Ji In Park, Hyun-Jin Yeo, Young-Jin Ro, Ha-Jung Kim
{"title":"髋部骨折患者腹股沟周围神经群阻滞和髂上筋膜室阻滞对动态疼痛的镇痛效果比较:随机对照试验。","authors":"Won Uk Koh, Hyungtae Kim, Yeon Ju Kim, Ji In Park, Hyun-Jin Yeo, Young-Jin Ro, Ha-Jung Kim","doi":"10.1136/rapm-2024-105627","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients with hip fracture often experience severe pain, particularly during movement or slight positional change, prior to the occurrence of surgery. It is essential to explore the appropriate analgesic methods before surgery in patients with hip fracture, especially those capable of alleviating dynamic pain. Pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block was introduced as a useful technique for hip analgesia. In this study, we aimed to compare the reduction in dynamic pain between the PENG block and supra-inguinal fascia iliaca compartment block (SIFICB).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective trial included 80 hip fracture patients aged ≥19 years, with an American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status of 1-4 and a baseline dynamic pain score ≥4 on the numerical rating scale. The patients were randomly allocated into the PENG block (n=40) and SIFICB group (n=40). For the PENG block and SIFICB, 20 mL and 30 mL of 0.3% ropivacaine was used, respectively. The primary outcome was reduction in dynamic pain scores at 30 min following the peripheral nerve block. Dynamic pain score was evaluated when the leg was passively raised.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 79 patients were included in the final analysis, and the reductions in pain score during hip flexion were 3.1±2.4 and 2.9±2.5 in the PENG block and SIFICB groups, respectively, which was statistically insignificant (p=0.75). Moreover, no significant differences were observed in any of the outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PENG block and SIFICB could effectively provide analgesia for dynamic pain in patients with hip fractures, with no significant difference between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT04677348.</p>","PeriodicalId":54503,"journal":{"name":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"635-640"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of analgesic effect of pericapsular nerve group block and supra-inguinal fascia iliaca compartment block on dynamic pain in patients with hip fractures: a randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Won Uk Koh, Hyungtae Kim, Yeon Ju Kim, Ji In Park, Hyun-Jin Yeo, Young-Jin Ro, Ha-Jung Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/rapm-2024-105627\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients with hip fracture often experience severe pain, particularly during movement or slight positional change, prior to the occurrence of surgery. It is essential to explore the appropriate analgesic methods before surgery in patients with hip fracture, especially those capable of alleviating dynamic pain. Pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block was introduced as a useful technique for hip analgesia. In this study, we aimed to compare the reduction in dynamic pain between the PENG block and supra-inguinal fascia iliaca compartment block (SIFICB).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective trial included 80 hip fracture patients aged ≥19 years, with an American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status of 1-4 and a baseline dynamic pain score ≥4 on the numerical rating scale. The patients were randomly allocated into the PENG block (n=40) and SIFICB group (n=40). For the PENG block and SIFICB, 20 mL and 30 mL of 0.3% ropivacaine was used, respectively. The primary outcome was reduction in dynamic pain scores at 30 min following the peripheral nerve block. Dynamic pain score was evaluated when the leg was passively raised.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 79 patients were included in the final analysis, and the reductions in pain score during hip flexion were 3.1±2.4 and 2.9±2.5 in the PENG block and SIFICB groups, respectively, which was statistically insignificant (p=0.75). Moreover, no significant differences were observed in any of the outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PENG block and SIFICB could effectively provide analgesia for dynamic pain in patients with hip fractures, with no significant difference between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT04677348.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54503,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"635-640\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2024-105627\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2024-105627","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:髋部骨折患者在手术前往往会感到剧烈疼痛,尤其是在运动或体位轻微改变时。在髋部骨折患者手术前探索适当的镇痛方法,尤其是能够减轻动态疼痛的方法至关重要。髋关节周围神经群(PENG)阻滞作为一种有用的髋部镇痛技术被引入。在这项研究中,我们旨在比较 PENG 阻滞与髂腹股沟上筋膜室阻滞(SIFICB)在减轻动态疼痛方面的效果:这项前瞻性试验纳入了 80 名年龄≥19 岁的髋部骨折患者,他们的美国麻醉医师协会身体状况为 1-4 级,基线动态疼痛评分≥4 分。患者被随机分配到 PENG 阻滞组(40 人)和 SIFICB 组(40 人)。PENG 阻滞和 SIFICB 分别使用了 20 毫升和 30 毫升 0.3% 罗哌卡因。主要结果是周围神经阻滞后 30 分钟动态疼痛评分的降低。动态疼痛评分在腿部被动抬起时进行评估:共有 79 名患者纳入最终分析,PENG 阻滞组和 SIFICB 组髋关节屈曲时的疼痛评分分别为(3.1±2.4)分和(2.9±2.5)分,差异无统计学意义(P=0.75)。此外,所有结果均无明显差异:结论:PENG阻滞和SIFICB可有效缓解髋部骨折患者的动态疼痛,两组间无显著差异:试验注册号:NCT04677348。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of analgesic effect of pericapsular nerve group block and supra-inguinal fascia iliaca compartment block on dynamic pain in patients with hip fractures: a randomized controlled trial.

Background: Patients with hip fracture often experience severe pain, particularly during movement or slight positional change, prior to the occurrence of surgery. It is essential to explore the appropriate analgesic methods before surgery in patients with hip fracture, especially those capable of alleviating dynamic pain. Pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block was introduced as a useful technique for hip analgesia. In this study, we aimed to compare the reduction in dynamic pain between the PENG block and supra-inguinal fascia iliaca compartment block (SIFICB).

Methods: This prospective trial included 80 hip fracture patients aged ≥19 years, with an American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status of 1-4 and a baseline dynamic pain score ≥4 on the numerical rating scale. The patients were randomly allocated into the PENG block (n=40) and SIFICB group (n=40). For the PENG block and SIFICB, 20 mL and 30 mL of 0.3% ropivacaine was used, respectively. The primary outcome was reduction in dynamic pain scores at 30 min following the peripheral nerve block. Dynamic pain score was evaluated when the leg was passively raised.

Results: A total of 79 patients were included in the final analysis, and the reductions in pain score during hip flexion were 3.1±2.4 and 2.9±2.5 in the PENG block and SIFICB groups, respectively, which was statistically insignificant (p=0.75). Moreover, no significant differences were observed in any of the outcomes.

Conclusions: PENG block and SIFICB could effectively provide analgesia for dynamic pain in patients with hip fractures, with no significant difference between the two groups.

Trial registration number: NCT04677348.

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
8.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
175
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, the official publication of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA), is a monthly journal that publishes peer-reviewed scientific and clinical studies to advance the understanding and clinical application of regional techniques for surgical anesthesia and postoperative analgesia. Coverage includes intraoperative regional techniques, perioperative pain, chronic pain, obstetric anesthesia, pediatric anesthesia, outcome studies, and complications. Published for over thirty years, this respected journal also serves as the official publication of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA), the Asian and Oceanic Society of Regional Anesthesia (AOSRA), the Latin American Society of Regional Anesthesia (LASRA), the African Society for Regional Anesthesia (AFSRA), and the Academy of Regional Anaesthesia of India (AORA).
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信