Effectiveness of subcutaneous morphine in the treatment of pain crises in cancer patients

Blanca Betsabe Aguilera-Elizalde, María del Rocío Guillén-Núñez, Á. Juárez-Lemus, R. Plancarte-Sánchez, Daniela Hernández-Rodríguez, Oliver Humberto González-Vega
{"title":"Effectiveness of subcutaneous morphine in the treatment of pain crises in cancer patients","authors":"Blanca Betsabe Aguilera-Elizalde, María del Rocío Guillén-Núñez, Á. Juárez-Lemus, R. Plancarte-Sánchez, Daniela Hernández-Rodríguez, Oliver Humberto González-Vega","doi":"10.22270/jddt.v14i2.6435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of subcutaneous morphine for managing pain crises resulting from various causes in cancer patients attended by the Pain Clinic in the immediate care area of the National Cancer Institute in Mexico City. \nMaterials and Methods: This study was analytical, observational, retrospective, and descriptive. The oncology patients treated in the immediate care area for pain crises between August 1, 2020, and July 1, 2023, made up our study population. We documented the management of pain crises for patients who needed subcutaneous morphine treatment. \nResults: Considering a reduction in Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score >30% as effective and a reduction <30% as ineffective, 566 patients didn’t require an additional dose of subcutaneous morphine to control the pain crisis; 11 patients reported a decrease of <30%. A total of 24 patients needed a second rescue. Among this group, only 5 responded well to the second morphine rescue; in the remaining 19 patients, the rescue was deemed ineffective if the NRS decreased by at least 30%. Only 5 individuals experienced moderate pain, and only one patient reported severe pain. The variables were compared using the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test with significance <0.05. Consequently, it may be said that there is a statistically significant difference between the first and subsequent NRS values obtained. \nConclusion: For oncology patients treated by the Pain Clinic in the immediate care section of the National Cancer Institute in Mexico City, subcutaneous morphine is beneficial in managing pain crises of different origins. \nKeywords: Morphine, Subcutaneous Pain crises, Efficacy, Numeric rating scale","PeriodicalId":506928,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Drug Delivery and Therapeutics","volume":"19 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Drug Delivery and Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22270/jddt.v14i2.6435","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of subcutaneous morphine for managing pain crises resulting from various causes in cancer patients attended by the Pain Clinic in the immediate care area of the National Cancer Institute in Mexico City. Materials and Methods: This study was analytical, observational, retrospective, and descriptive. The oncology patients treated in the immediate care area for pain crises between August 1, 2020, and July 1, 2023, made up our study population. We documented the management of pain crises for patients who needed subcutaneous morphine treatment. Results: Considering a reduction in Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score >30% as effective and a reduction <30% as ineffective, 566 patients didn’t require an additional dose of subcutaneous morphine to control the pain crisis; 11 patients reported a decrease of <30%. A total of 24 patients needed a second rescue. Among this group, only 5 responded well to the second morphine rescue; in the remaining 19 patients, the rescue was deemed ineffective if the NRS decreased by at least 30%. Only 5 individuals experienced moderate pain, and only one patient reported severe pain. The variables were compared using the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test with significance <0.05. Consequently, it may be said that there is a statistically significant difference between the first and subsequent NRS values obtained. Conclusion: For oncology patients treated by the Pain Clinic in the immediate care section of the National Cancer Institute in Mexico City, subcutaneous morphine is beneficial in managing pain crises of different origins. Keywords: Morphine, Subcutaneous Pain crises, Efficacy, Numeric rating scale
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
皮下注射吗啡治疗癌症患者疼痛危机的效果
研究目的本研究的目的是评估皮下注射吗啡对墨西哥城国家癌症研究所直属护理区疼痛门诊就诊的癌症患者因各种原因引起的疼痛危机的疗效。材料和方法:本研究为分析性、观察性、回顾性和描述性研究。在 2020 年 8 月 1 日至 2023 年 7 月 1 日期间,因疼痛危机而在即时护理区接受治疗的肿瘤患者构成了我们的研究对象。我们记录了需要皮下注射吗啡治疗的患者的疼痛危机处理情况。研究结果如果数值评定量表(NRS)评分下降>30%为有效,下降<30%为无效,则有566名患者不需要额外剂量的皮下注射吗啡来控制疼痛危机;有11名患者的评分下降<30%。共有 24 名患者需要第二次抢救。在这组患者中,只有 5 人对第二次吗啡抢救反应良好;在其余 19 名患者中,如果 NRS 下降至少 30%,则认为抢救无效。只有 5 人经历了中度疼痛,只有一名患者报告了重度疼痛。变量比较采用非参数曼-惠特尼 U 检验,显著性<0.05。因此,可以说首次获得的 NRS 值和随后获得的 NRS 值之间存在着显著的统计学差异。结论对于在墨西哥城国家癌症研究所即时护理部疼痛门诊接受治疗的肿瘤患者来说,皮下注射吗啡有利于控制不同原因引起的疼痛危机。关键词:吗啡吗啡 皮下注射 疼痛危机 疗效 数值评分量表
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Relationship between antibody titer than the Incidence of Infection After Complete Dose of COVID-19 Astrazeneca Vaccination Based on Sociodemographics A Basic Review on Hypertension, its Non-Pharmacological and Pharmacological Treatment Formulation and Evaluation of Moxifloxacin Hydrochloride Loaded Cubosomal Gel for Ocular Delivery Design, Synthesis, Characterization and Biological Evaluation of Novel Depsides as Potential Antibacterials Synthesis and characterizations of Hg (II) Complex of Macrocyclic complexes compounds Tetradecahydrodibenzo hexaazacyclooctadecine with HgX2 (X= Cl, Br) by Hirshfeld analysis and antimicrobial activity
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1