Post-traumatic stress and awareness in patient with traumatic lower limb surgery by neuraxial anesthesia: A randomized clinical trial

IF 0.3 Q4 PSYCHIATRY Archives of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Pub Date : 2023-06-22 DOI:10.12740/app/159084
M. Hashemian, Farshad Zandrahimi, Amirhossein Mirafzal, Hamid Pakmanesh, Ladan Amirkhosravi
{"title":"Post-traumatic stress and awareness in patient with traumatic lower limb surgery by neuraxial anesthesia: A randomized clinical trial","authors":"M. Hashemian, Farshad Zandrahimi, Amirhossein Mirafzal, Hamid Pakmanesh, Ladan Amirkhosravi","doi":"10.12740/app/159084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Anesthesia decreases brain cognitive function, memory and pain, and also leads to the loss of consciousness. In this study, midazolam and propofol-sedated trauma patients undergoing lower limb surgery were evaluated for stress levels after neuraxial anesthesia.This double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted on patients with lower extremity fractures due to trauma, who were candidates of elective lower extremity orthopedic surgery. Patients were randomly divided into two groups of propofol-sedated patients (n=110) and midazolam-sedated patients (n=110) after neuraxial anesthesia. Then, all patients underwent spinal anesthesia using 3 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine (3 mg/kg). Propofol (25-75 µg/kg/minute) was infused, and 1-2 mg of midazolam was injected PRN until patients reached the score of 3 on the Modified Observers' Assessment of Alertness/ Sedation Scale (MOAA/S).Preoperative sedation/alertness scores of patients in the two groups did not differ significantly from one another. Penetrating memories in the midazolam group was higher than the propofol group (P<0.05). Personal relationship problem was more significant in the midazolam group than the propofol group (P<0.05). Inability in controlling emotional feelings was higher in the midazolam group compared to the propofol group (P<0.001).Our findings indicated that a sub-hypnotic dose of propofol provided superior sedation and amnesia compared to midazolam. Aspects of stress, including penetrating memories, personal relationship problems, inability to control emotional feelings, and lack of depression during spinal anesthesia were better managed by propofol compared to midazolam.Propofol infusion was better in decreasing stress levels after surgery compared to midazolam.","PeriodicalId":44856,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12740/app/159084","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Anesthesia decreases brain cognitive function, memory and pain, and also leads to the loss of consciousness. In this study, midazolam and propofol-sedated trauma patients undergoing lower limb surgery were evaluated for stress levels after neuraxial anesthesia.This double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted on patients with lower extremity fractures due to trauma, who were candidates of elective lower extremity orthopedic surgery. Patients were randomly divided into two groups of propofol-sedated patients (n=110) and midazolam-sedated patients (n=110) after neuraxial anesthesia. Then, all patients underwent spinal anesthesia using 3 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine (3 mg/kg). Propofol (25-75 µg/kg/minute) was infused, and 1-2 mg of midazolam was injected PRN until patients reached the score of 3 on the Modified Observers' Assessment of Alertness/ Sedation Scale (MOAA/S).Preoperative sedation/alertness scores of patients in the two groups did not differ significantly from one another. Penetrating memories in the midazolam group was higher than the propofol group (P<0.05). Personal relationship problem was more significant in the midazolam group than the propofol group (P<0.05). Inability in controlling emotional feelings was higher in the midazolam group compared to the propofol group (P<0.001).Our findings indicated that a sub-hypnotic dose of propofol provided superior sedation and amnesia compared to midazolam. Aspects of stress, including penetrating memories, personal relationship problems, inability to control emotional feelings, and lack of depression during spinal anesthesia were better managed by propofol compared to midazolam.Propofol infusion was better in decreasing stress levels after surgery compared to midazolam.
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
神经轴麻对创伤性下肢手术患者创伤后应激和意识的影响:一项随机临床试验
麻醉会降低大脑的认知功能、记忆和疼痛,还会导致意识丧失。在这项研究中,咪达唑仑和异丙酚镇静的创伤患者接受下肢手术后评估神经轴麻醉后的应激水平。本双盲随机临床试验是在选择性下肢骨科手术的候选者中,对创伤所致下肢骨折患者进行的。经轴向麻醉后,随机分为异丙酚镇静组(n=110)和咪达唑仑镇静组(n=110)。然后,所有患者均使用3ml 0.5%布比卡因(3mg /kg)进行脊髓麻醉。给予异丙酚(25 ~ 75µg/kg/min)输注,同时给予咪达唑仑1 ~ 2mg PRN注射,直至MOAA/S评分达到3分。两组患者术前镇静/警觉性评分无显著差异。咪达唑仑组穿透记忆能力高于异丙酚组(P<0.05)。人际关系问题在咪达唑仑组显著高于异丙酚组(P<0.05)。与异丙酚组相比,咪达唑仑组情绪控制能力较差(P<0.001)。我们的研究结果表明,与咪达唑仑相比,亚催眠剂量的异丙酚提供了更好的镇静和健忘症。与咪达唑仑相比,异丙酚能更好地控制脊髓麻醉期间的压力方面,包括穿透性记忆、个人关系问题、无法控制情绪以及缺乏抑郁。与咪达唑仑相比,异丙酚输注在降低术后应激水平方面效果更好。
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
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊最新文献
Linking disgust and misophonia: The role of mental contamination Self-harm behaviors before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in a high-risk group Five reasons why a conversational artificial intelligence cannot be treated as a moral agent in psychotherapy Attachment relationship and oxytocin among people addicted to alcohol – a literature review Social cognition and attachment profiles of women with fibromyalgia syndrome: a case-control study
×
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