期刊文献+

烧伤病人切削痂植皮术后三种不同药物镇痛效果的观察 被引量:6

Efficacy of three different pain medications after shaving or excising eschar in deeply burned patients
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的比较镇痛药物地佐辛、芬太尼、曲马多用于切削痂植皮术后静脉镇痛的效果及安全性。方法择期行切削痂植皮术全麻患者84例,随机分为3组。术毕各组分别静脉注射地佐辛0.1 mg.kg-1,芬太尼0.002 mg.kg-1,曲马多2 mg.kg-1。观察并记录各组VAS评分、Ramsay镇静评分,并进行安全性评价。结果地佐辛组和芬太尼组在0.5,1,4 h观察时段VAS评分明显低于曲马多组(P<0.05);地佐辛组在0.5,1 h观察时段Ramsay镇静评分显著高于芬太尼组和曲马多组(P<0.05);3组均有胃肠道不良反应,组间无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。结论静脉注射地佐辛0.1 mg.kg-1对烧伤病人切削痂植皮术后安全有效。 Objective To explore the effect of three different pain medications when using after shaving or excising eschar in deeply burned patients.Methods84 patients treated with excision of eschar and dermepenthsis of empyrosis were divided into three groups randomly,which were respectively injected with Dezocine 0.1 mg·kg-1,Fentanyl 0.002 mg·kg-1,and Tramadol 2 mg·kg-1 when the surgery was over.Compare the VAS analgesic score,Ramsay sedative score and the side reaction among the three groups.They were recorded within 24 h after operations.ResultsThe VAS scores of dezocine group and fentanyl group were much lower than those of tramadol group at 0.5,1,4 h after operation(P〈0.05).The Ramsay sedative score of dezocine group were much higher than those of fentanyl group and tramadol group at 0.5,1 h after operation(P〈0.05).The patients in three groups all had gastrointestinal side effects without statistics difference(P〉0.05).ConclusionIntravenous dezocine 0.1 mg·kg-1 is effective and safe for deeply burned patients with shaving or excising eschar operation.
出处 《中国临床药理学杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2012年第4期263-265,共3页 The Chinese Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
关键词 切痂术 削痂术 地佐辛 芬太尼 曲马多 eschar excision tangential excision of eschar dezocine fentanyl tramadol
  • 相关文献

参考文献9

二级参考文献18

  • 1朱德浩,林学武.奈福泮用于术后静脉镇痛的临床观察[J].实用全科医学,2005,3(3):215-216. 被引量:8
  • 2许国忠,吕黄伟,傅文,王俊科,盛卓人.曲吗多静脉诱导时对心血管反应的影响[J].中华麻醉学杂志,1994,14(1):27-29. 被引量:20
  • 3方之扬 吴中立.烧伤理论与实践[M].沈阳:辽宁科学技术出版社,1989.476.
  • 4[1]Stamer UM, Grond S, Maier C. Responders and non-responders to post-operative pain treatment: the loading dose predicts analgesic needs. Eur J Anaesthesiol, 1999; 16:103~110.
  • 5[2]Silvasti M, Svartling N, Pitkanen M, et al. Comparison of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia with tramadol versus morphine after microvascular breast reconstruction. Eur J Anaesthesiol,2000;17:448~455.
  • 6[3]Naguib M, Seraj M, Attia M, et al. Perioperative antinociceptive effects of tramadol. A prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison with morphine. Can J Anaesth, 1998;45:1168~1175.
  • 7[4]Ng KF, Tsui SL, Yang JC, et al. Increased nausea and dizziness when using tramadol for post-operative patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) compared with morphine after intraoperative loading with morphine. Eur J Anaesthesiol, 1998; 15:565~570.
  • 8[5]Scott LJ Perry CM.. Tramadol: a review of its use in perioperative pain. Drugs,2000;60:139~176.
  • 9[6]Vickers MD, Paravicini D. Comparison of tramadol with morphine for post-operative pain following abdominal surgery. Eur J Anaesthesiology, 1995; 12:265 ~271.
  • 10[7]Ronald D. Miller. Anesthesia, Churchill Livingstone, 2000,334.

共引文献662

同被引文献36

二级引证文献36

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部