M. Haghighi, Bahram Naderi Nabi, H. Khoshrang, S. Rimaz, Soudabeh Haddadi, A. Parvizi, M. Mobayen, Gelareh Biazar, Tayebeh Zarei
{"title":"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","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":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"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}","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}
The Effectiveness of Intravenous lidocaine in Burn Pain Relief: A Randomized Double-Blind Controlled Trial
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.
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