战地针灸与酮罗拉酸在急诊科治疗疼痛的比较

Eva Galka, Zane Elfessi, Tulika Singh, Erica Liu, Caitlin Turnbull
{"title":"战地针灸与酮罗拉酸在急诊科治疗疼痛的比较","authors":"Eva Galka,&nbsp;Zane Elfessi,&nbsp;Tulika Singh,&nbsp;Erica Liu,&nbsp;Caitlin Turnbull","doi":"10.12788/fp.0369","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many patients arrive in the emergency department (ED) with acute pain. Battlefield acupuncture (BFA) uses small, semipermanent acupuncture needles in 5 set points anatomically located on each ear to reduce pain in a few minutes. Pain relief can last months, depending on the pathology of the pain. At the Jesse Brown Veterans Affairs Medical Center (JBVAMC) ED, ketorolac 15 mg is the preferred first-line treatment of acute, noncancer pain. In 2018, BFA was offered first to veterans presenting with acute or acute-on-chronic pain to the ED; however, its effectiveness in pain reduction vs ketorolac has not been evaluated in this patient population. The objective of this study was to determine whether BFA monotherapy was noninferior to ketorolac 15 mg for reducing pain scores in the ED.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was a retrospective, electronic chart review of patients who presented to JBVAMC ED with acute pain or acute-on-chronic pain and received ketorolac or BFA. The primary endpoint was the mean difference in the numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score from baseline. Secondary endpoints included the number of patients receiving pain medications, including topical analgesics, at discharge and treatment-related adverse events in the ED.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 61 patients were included in the study. Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups except for the average baseline NRS pain score, which was higher in the BFA group (8.7 vs 7.7; <i>P</i> = .02). The mean difference in NRS pain scores from baseline to post-intervention was 3.9 for the BFA group and 5.1 for the ketorolac group. The difference in reducing the NRS pain score between the intervention groups was not statistically significant. No adverse events were observed in either treatment group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For treating acute and acute-on-chronic pain in the ED, BFA did not differ compared with ketorolac 15 mg in NRS pain score reduction. This study's results add to the limited existing literature suggesting that both interventions could result in clinically significant reductions in pain scores for patients presenting to the ED with severe and very severe pain, indicating BFA could be a viable nonpharmacologic treatment option.</p>","PeriodicalId":73021,"journal":{"name":"Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS","volume":"40 4","pages":"110-115"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10202138/pdf/fp-40-04-110.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Battlefield Acupuncture vs Ketorolac for Treating Pain in the Emergency Department.\",\"authors\":\"Eva Galka,&nbsp;Zane Elfessi,&nbsp;Tulika Singh,&nbsp;Erica Liu,&nbsp;Caitlin Turnbull\",\"doi\":\"10.12788/fp.0369\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many patients arrive in the emergency department (ED) with acute pain. Battlefield acupuncture (BFA) uses small, semipermanent acupuncture needles in 5 set points anatomically located on each ear to reduce pain in a few minutes. Pain relief can last months, depending on the pathology of the pain. At the Jesse Brown Veterans Affairs Medical Center (JBVAMC) ED, ketorolac 15 mg is the preferred first-line treatment of acute, noncancer pain. In 2018, BFA was offered first to veterans presenting with acute or acute-on-chronic pain to the ED; however, its effectiveness in pain reduction vs ketorolac has not been evaluated in this patient population. The objective of this study was to determine whether BFA monotherapy was noninferior to ketorolac 15 mg for reducing pain scores in the ED.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was a retrospective, electronic chart review of patients who presented to JBVAMC ED with acute pain or acute-on-chronic pain and received ketorolac or BFA. The primary endpoint was the mean difference in the numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score from baseline. Secondary endpoints included the number of patients receiving pain medications, including topical analgesics, at discharge and treatment-related adverse events in the ED.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 61 patients were included in the study. Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups except for the average baseline NRS pain score, which was higher in the BFA group (8.7 vs 7.7; <i>P</i> = .02). The mean difference in NRS pain scores from baseline to post-intervention was 3.9 for the BFA group and 5.1 for the ketorolac group. The difference in reducing the NRS pain score between the intervention groups was not statistically significant. No adverse events were observed in either treatment group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For treating acute and acute-on-chronic pain in the ED, BFA did not differ compared with ketorolac 15 mg in NRS pain score reduction. This study's results add to the limited existing literature suggesting that both interventions could result in clinically significant reductions in pain scores for patients presenting to the ED with severe and very severe pain, indicating BFA could be a viable nonpharmacologic treatment option.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73021,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS\",\"volume\":\"40 4\",\"pages\":\"110-115\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10202138/pdf/fp-40-04-110.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12788/fp.0369\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12788/fp.0369","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:许多患者来到急诊科(ED)急性疼痛。战地针灸(BFA)使用小的、半永久性的针灸针,在每只耳朵上的5个解剖学上的穴位上,在几分钟内减轻疼痛。疼痛的缓解可以持续数月,这取决于疼痛的病理。在杰西布朗退伍军人事务医疗中心(JBVAMC) ED, 15毫克酮洛酸是首选的一线治疗急性,非癌性疼痛。2018年,BFA首先提供给急诊科出现急性或急性慢性疼痛的退伍军人;然而,与酮罗拉酸相比,其减轻疼痛的有效性尚未在该患者群体中进行评估。本研究的目的是确定BFA单药治疗在降低ED疼痛评分方面是否优于酮洛拉酸15mg。方法:本研究是一项回顾性的电子图表回顾,这些患者在JBVAMC ED就诊时伴有急性疼痛或急性慢性疼痛,并接受了酮洛拉酸或BFA治疗。主要终点是数值评定量表(NRS)疼痛评分与基线的平均差异。次要终点包括出院时接受止痛药(包括局部镇痛药)的患者数量和ed中与治疗相关的不良事件。结果:共有61名患者纳入研究。两组之间的基线特征相似,除了平均基线NRS疼痛评分,BFA组更高(8.7 vs 7.7;P = .02)。从基线到干预后NRS疼痛评分的平均差异BFA组为3.9,酮罗拉酸组为5.1。干预组间NRS疼痛评分降低差异无统计学意义。两组均未见不良事件发生。结论:对于治疗急症患者的急性和急性伴慢性疼痛,BFA与酮洛拉酸15mg在NRS疼痛评分降低方面没有差异。本研究的结果补充了有限的现有文献,表明这两种干预措施都可以显著降低患有严重和非常严重疼痛的ED患者的疼痛评分,表明BFA可能是一种可行的非药物治疗选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Battlefield Acupuncture vs Ketorolac for Treating Pain in the Emergency Department.

Background: Many patients arrive in the emergency department (ED) with acute pain. Battlefield acupuncture (BFA) uses small, semipermanent acupuncture needles in 5 set points anatomically located on each ear to reduce pain in a few minutes. Pain relief can last months, depending on the pathology of the pain. At the Jesse Brown Veterans Affairs Medical Center (JBVAMC) ED, ketorolac 15 mg is the preferred first-line treatment of acute, noncancer pain. In 2018, BFA was offered first to veterans presenting with acute or acute-on-chronic pain to the ED; however, its effectiveness in pain reduction vs ketorolac has not been evaluated in this patient population. The objective of this study was to determine whether BFA monotherapy was noninferior to ketorolac 15 mg for reducing pain scores in the ED.

Methods: This study was a retrospective, electronic chart review of patients who presented to JBVAMC ED with acute pain or acute-on-chronic pain and received ketorolac or BFA. The primary endpoint was the mean difference in the numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score from baseline. Secondary endpoints included the number of patients receiving pain medications, including topical analgesics, at discharge and treatment-related adverse events in the ED.

Results: A total of 61 patients were included in the study. Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups except for the average baseline NRS pain score, which was higher in the BFA group (8.7 vs 7.7; P = .02). The mean difference in NRS pain scores from baseline to post-intervention was 3.9 for the BFA group and 5.1 for the ketorolac group. The difference in reducing the NRS pain score between the intervention groups was not statistically significant. No adverse events were observed in either treatment group.

Conclusions: For treating acute and acute-on-chronic pain in the ED, BFA did not differ compared with ketorolac 15 mg in NRS pain score reduction. This study's results add to the limited existing literature suggesting that both interventions could result in clinically significant reductions in pain scores for patients presenting to the ED with severe and very severe pain, indicating BFA could be a viable nonpharmacologic treatment option.

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