Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Oct 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialPatient-controlled analgesia with morphine plus lysine acetyl salicylate.
Using a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) delivery system, we evaluated the clinical advantages and disadvantages of morphine PCA compared with morphine plus lysine acetyl salicylate (LAS), a soluble aspirin. After major orthopedic surgery, 50 adult patients were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, and double-blinded study. When a patient in the recovery room complained of pain, an initial dose of morphine or the morphine/LAS mixture was titrated to achieve analgesia of visual analog score < or = 3 in 30 min. An equivalent volume PCA dose of either morphine 1 mg/mL or morphine 0.5 mg + LAS 90 mg/mL was used with a lockout interval of 10 min. Pain score, patient satisfaction, vital signs, and adverse effects were observed for 48 h. Adequate analgesia (visual analog scale score < or = 3) was achieved with either drug. Morphine consumption in the morphine/LAS group was significantly less than in morphine group (13.9 vs 18.4 mg in 24 h and 24.3 vs 32.4 mg in 48 h). Significantly more sedation was evident with the morphine group (P < 0.05). We conclude that injectable LAS can be used as an effective and safe adjuvant to morphine for PCA. This combination reduces dose requirements of morphine and hence some of its adverse effects. ⋯ Injectable aspirin could be used as an effective and safe adjuvant to morphine for patient-controlled analgesia. This combination reduces the dose requirement of morphine and therefore some of the morphine-related untoward effects.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Oct 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialComparison of the sedation and recovery profiles of Ro 48-6791, a new benzodiazepine, and midazolam in combination with meperidine for outpatient endoscopic procedures.
In this randomized, double-blinded study, we compared the onset and recovery characteristics of an investigational benzodiazepine, Ro 48-6791 (when administered alone or combined with meperidine), a midazolam-meperidine combination for sedation during gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures. Ninety consenting outpatients scheduled for upper or lower GI procedures were randomly assigned as follows: Group I received midazolam 1 mg IV and meperidine 50 mg; Group II received Ro 48-6791 0.5 mg IV and meperidine 50 mg; or Group III received Ro 48-6791 1.0 mg IV alone. If the level of sedation did not achieve an Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (OAA/S) score of 4 (where 5 = awake/alert to 1 = asleep) in < or = 2 min, a second bolus dose, equal to half of the original dose of midazolam or Ro 48-6791, was administered. The onset time was defined as the time to achieve an OAA/S score of 4. During the procedure, a bolus dose equal to half of the total induction dose was given to maintain an OAA/S score of 4. The induction and maintenance dosages, as well as recovery times to an OAA/S score of 5, were recorded. A heel-toe line walk (HTLW) test used to determine the time to "fitness for discharge." Although the onset times were similar in all three groups, the induction dosages were significantly reduced in Group II compared with Groups I and III. There were significantly more patients requiring supplemental sedative boluses and "rescue" analgesia with Ro 48-6791 than with midazolam. The Ro 48-6791 groups also experienced more dizziness after the procedures. Ro 48-6791 was associated with a higher incidence of inadequate sedation (18% vs 3%) without the opioid. The time for the HTLW test to return to baseline values after the procedure was similar among the three groups. However, the Ro 48-6791 groups had significantly reduced times to return to an OAA/S score of 5 and to achieve the baseline HTLW value after the last dose of the benzodiazepine. In conclusion, compared with midazolam, Ro 48-6791 is more potent and may be associated with a more rapid early recovery after endoscopic GI procedures. However, sedation with Ro 48-6791 required more supplemental bolus doses and "rescue" analgesic medication and was associated with a higher incidence of dizziness. ⋯ The investigational water-soluble benzodiazepine, Ro 48-6791, is a more potent sedative than midazolam, which appears to have a slightly shorter duration of action. Unfortunately, use of Ro 48-6791 increased the requirement for supplemental doses of the sedative medication and the need for "rescue" analgesics during the procedure and was associated with more dizziness after the procedure.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Oct 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialVideotape increases parental knowledge about pediatric pain management.
Pediatric pain management often depends on parents recognition and assessment of their child's pain and their beliefs as to whether the pain should be treated. Parental misconceptions concerning pain assessment and pain management may therefore result in inadequate pain treatment, particularly in patients who are too young or too developmentally handicapped to self-report their pain. We hypothesized that viewing a concise, educational videotape would provide parents with instructive information that could correct misconceptions concerning pain and pain management in children. To do this, we evaluated the impact of an educational videotape on parental responses to a questionnaire about pediatric pain management. Parents of children scheduled for inpatient, postoperative hospital care were studied. After answering 30 questions, parents were randomly assigned to either view (Group 1) or not view (Group 2) a 19-min educational videotape. Immediately after viewing the videotape (Group 1), or 30 min after taking the first test (Group 2), parents were asked to answer the same questionnaire a second time. The effect of seeing the videotape was assessed by comparing post-pre test score differences using paired t-test. One-hundred parents were studied. Randomization was effective in assigning equitable groups. Initial scores of percent answers correct in each group were not different ([mean +/- SD] Group 1 [n = 50]: 68.7% +/- 18.8% vs Group 2 [n = 50]: 61.5% +/- 22.7%; P = 0.09). Viewing the videotape effectively increased test scores: paired t-test within groups demonstrated a significant difference in Group 1 (22.4% +/- 16.5%, P < 0.0001), whereas Group 2 scores changed to a much lesser degree (2.7% +/- 8.3%, P = 0.0271). All parents who viewed the videotape stated that it was informative regarding their understanding of their child's pain management. This study demonstrates the effectiveness of an educational videotape in changing parental knowledge concerning postoperative pediatric pain. This effective and efficient teaching medium may be useful in improving pain management in postoperative pediatric surgical patients. ⋯ Pediatric pain management often depends on parents recognition and assessment of their child's pain and their beliefs as to whether the pain should be treated. This prospective, randomized, controlled study demonstrated the effectiveness of an educational videotape in changing parental knowledge concerning postoperative pediatric pain. This effective and efficient teaching medium may be useful in preventing inadequate pain management in postoperative pediatric surgical patients.