丙泊酚用于无痛胃肠镜的镇痛效果评定及安全性分析

Analgesic Effect Assessment and Safety Analysis of Propofol for Painless Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

目的:分析丙泊酚用于无痛胃肠镜诊疗术的临床应用效果及安全性。方法:选择要进行肠镜检查的100例患者,将之简单随机分组分为观察组和对照组。观察组采用无痛胃肠镜诊疗术,在进行胃肠镜检查和治疗前,给予患者丙泊酚用于麻醉镇痛;对照组患者直接进行胃肠镜检查和治疗。比较分析患者的生命体征,包括了血氧饱和度(SpO2)和心率(HR)等,并比较两组患者术后的疗效。结果:对于观察组患者,HR、SpO2在进行诊断检查前后没有发生明显的变化,组内无差异(P>0.05);而对于对照组患者,HR在进行肠镜检查前后有着较为明显的波动,但SpO2的变化较平稳,组内比较差异显著(P<0.05)。观察组患者治疗后总有效率为98%,明显高于对照组76%;观察组患者胃肠镜诊治前非常紧张人数所占比例12%,明显低于对照组,与对照组相比,观察组患者的心理状态相对更好;观察组相较对照组,在进行检查时患者出现不良反应率相对较低(P<0.05)。结论:与常规的胃肠镜手术相比,无痛胃肠镜诊疗有着明显的优势,其不仅能够有效的减轻患者的疼痛,同时有着较好的适应性,另外也具有不良反应少的优势,检查过程中对患者HR、SpO2等无明显影响,安全性高,且患者对操作的满意度高,值得在临床上广泛应用。

Objective: To analyze the clinical effect and safety of propofol for painless gastroscopy. Methods: 100 patients undergoing colonoscopy were selected and simple random divided into observation group and control group equally. The observation group was treated with painless gastrointestinal endoscopy. Before gastrointestinal endoscopy and treatment, propofol was given to patients for anesthesia and analgesia;the control group patients directly for gastrointestinal endoscopy examination and treatment. The vital signs, including blood oxygen saturation (SpO2) and heart rate (HR), were compared and analyzed, and the postoperative effects of the two groups were compared. Results: For the observation group, HR and SpO 2 did not change significantly before and after diagnostic examination, and there was no difference between two groups (P>0.05);in control group, HR fluctuated significantly before and after enteroscopy, but the change of SpO 2 was more stable, with significant difference between the two groups (P<0.05). The total effective rate in the observation group (98%) was higher than in the control group(76%);12% of the patients in the observation group were very nervous before gastrointestinal endoscopy treatment, which was significantly lower than that in the control group. Compared with the control group, the psychological state of the observation group was relatively better;compared with the control group, the patients in the observation group appeared bad after the examination. Compared with the control group, the observation group had a relatively low adverse reaction rate (P<0.05). Conclusion: Compared with conventional gastrointestinal endoscopy, painless gastrointestinal endoscopy has obvious advantages. It not only can effectively alleviate the pain of patients, but also has a better adaptability, and has the advantage of fewer adverse reactions. It has no significant impact on HR, SpO2 and other patients in the course of examination, and has high safety. The satisfaction degree of operation is high, which is worthy of wide application in clinic. But its price is high, and it has certain limitations in clinical popularization.