曲马多与海莨菪碱-正丁基溴在分娩第一阶段的产中镇痛作用

Ashraf AbouSlemah
{"title":"曲马多与海莨菪碱-正丁基溴在分娩第一阶段的产中镇痛作用","authors":"Ashraf AbouSlemah","doi":"10.4103/asja.asja_53_16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective The aim was to evaluate and compare the analgesic efficacy of tramadol versus hyoscine-N-butylbromide intramuscularly given during the active phase of the first stage of labor. Materials and methods This prospective study included 140, American Society of Anesthesiologists I, laboring primigravidae, who were divided into two equal groups: group I (group B) received hyoscine-N-butylbromide (Buscopan) 40 mg intramuscular and group II (group T) received tramadol 100 mg intramuscular. Labor pain was assessed by visual analog scale before and at 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, and 3 h after drug administration. Maternal and neonatal adverse effects, drug-delivery interval, mode of delivery, need for additional analgesia, and postpartum maternal satisfaction were assessed too. Results Baseline visual analog scale scores were comparable between the groups (P>0.05). Pain scores at 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, and 3 h were significantly higher (P<0.001) in group B. Overall, 30 (42.8%) women in group B required additional analgesia versus only seven (10%) women in group T (P<0.001). Drug-delivery interval was significantly (P<0.05) shorter in group B at 175 versus 220 min in group T. Apgar score at 1 min was significantly higher (P<0.05) in group B, whereas the scores at 5 min were comparable (P>0.05). A total of 56 (80%) women in group B had adverse effects versus 54 (77.1%) women in group T (P>0.05). Adverse effects were generally mild (well tolerated). Cesarean delivery percentages were comparable between the groups (P>0.05). Postpartum maternal satisfaction was significantly higher (P<0.001) in group T. Conclusion Although Buscopan is cheap and safe, it is a less effective intrapartum analgesic than tramadol. It offers shorter duration of labor, so it is better recommended for primiparous women.","PeriodicalId":7492,"journal":{"name":"Ain-Shams Journal of Anaesthesiology","volume":"31 1","pages":"201 - 206"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tramadol versus hyoscine-N-butylbromide as intrapartum analgesics during the first stage of labor\",\"authors\":\"Ashraf AbouSlemah\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/asja.asja_53_16\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective The aim was to evaluate and compare the analgesic efficacy of tramadol versus hyoscine-N-butylbromide intramuscularly given during the active phase of the first stage of labor. Materials and methods This prospective study included 140, American Society of Anesthesiologists I, laboring primigravidae, who were divided into two equal groups: group I (group B) received hyoscine-N-butylbromide (Buscopan) 40 mg intramuscular and group II (group T) received tramadol 100 mg intramuscular. Labor pain was assessed by visual analog scale before and at 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, and 3 h after drug administration. Maternal and neonatal adverse effects, drug-delivery interval, mode of delivery, need for additional analgesia, and postpartum maternal satisfaction were assessed too. Results Baseline visual analog scale scores were comparable between the groups (P>0.05). Pain scores at 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, and 3 h were significantly higher (P<0.001) in group B. Overall, 30 (42.8%) women in group B required additional analgesia versus only seven (10%) women in group T (P<0.001). Drug-delivery interval was significantly (P<0.05) shorter in group B at 175 versus 220 min in group T. Apgar score at 1 min was significantly higher (P<0.05) in group B, whereas the scores at 5 min were comparable (P>0.05). A total of 56 (80%) women in group B had adverse effects versus 54 (77.1%) women in group T (P>0.05). Adverse effects were generally mild (well tolerated). Cesarean delivery percentages were comparable between the groups (P>0.05). Postpartum maternal satisfaction was significantly higher (P<0.001) in group T. Conclusion Although Buscopan is cheap and safe, it is a less effective intrapartum analgesic than tramadol. It offers shorter duration of labor, so it is better recommended for primiparous women.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7492,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ain-Shams Journal of Anaesthesiology\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"201 - 206\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ain-Shams Journal of Anaesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/asja.asja_53_16\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ain-Shams Journal of Anaesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/asja.asja_53_16","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

目的评价和比较曲马多与宫莨菪碱-正丁基溴肌注在第一产程活跃期的镇痛效果。材料与方法本前瞻性研究纳入美国第一麻醉师学会初产产妇140例,随机分为两组:ⅰ组(B组)肌注海莨菪碱- n -丁基溴(Buscopan) 40 mg,ⅱ组(T组)肌注曲马多100 mg。在给药前、给药30 min、给药1 h、给药2 h、给药3 h时采用视觉模拟量表评估产程疼痛。对产妇和新生儿不良反应、给药间隔、分娩方式、额外镇痛的需要以及产后产妇满意度也进行了评估。结果各组间基线视觉模拟量表评分具有可比性(P>0.05)。30 min、1 h、2 h、3 h疼痛评分显著高于对照组(P0.05)。B组56例(80%)出现不良反应,T组54例(77.1%)出现不良反应(P>0.05)。不良反应一般轻微(耐受性良好)。两组间剖宫产率比较,差异有统计学意义(P>0.05)。t组产妇产后满意度显著高于t组(P<0.001)。结论布司可潘价格便宜、安全,但其产时镇痛效果不及曲马多。它提供了较短的分娩时间,所以它是最好的建议初产妇。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Tramadol versus hyoscine-N-butylbromide as intrapartum analgesics during the first stage of labor
Objective The aim was to evaluate and compare the analgesic efficacy of tramadol versus hyoscine-N-butylbromide intramuscularly given during the active phase of the first stage of labor. Materials and methods This prospective study included 140, American Society of Anesthesiologists I, laboring primigravidae, who were divided into two equal groups: group I (group B) received hyoscine-N-butylbromide (Buscopan) 40 mg intramuscular and group II (group T) received tramadol 100 mg intramuscular. Labor pain was assessed by visual analog scale before and at 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, and 3 h after drug administration. Maternal and neonatal adverse effects, drug-delivery interval, mode of delivery, need for additional analgesia, and postpartum maternal satisfaction were assessed too. Results Baseline visual analog scale scores were comparable between the groups (P>0.05). Pain scores at 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, and 3 h were significantly higher (P<0.001) in group B. Overall, 30 (42.8%) women in group B required additional analgesia versus only seven (10%) women in group T (P<0.001). Drug-delivery interval was significantly (P<0.05) shorter in group B at 175 versus 220 min in group T. Apgar score at 1 min was significantly higher (P<0.05) in group B, whereas the scores at 5 min were comparable (P>0.05). A total of 56 (80%) women in group B had adverse effects versus 54 (77.1%) women in group T (P>0.05). Adverse effects were generally mild (well tolerated). Cesarean delivery percentages were comparable between the groups (P>0.05). Postpartum maternal satisfaction was significantly higher (P<0.001) in group T. Conclusion Although Buscopan is cheap and safe, it is a less effective intrapartum analgesic than tramadol. It offers shorter duration of labor, so it is better recommended for primiparous women.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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