比较右美托咪定和咪达唑仑对神经内科重症监护室机械通气患者的镇静作用

Jui A Jadhav, Shrilekha Mankhair, N. Verma
{"title":"比较右美托咪定和咪达唑仑对神经内科重症监护室机械通气患者的镇静作用","authors":"Jui A Jadhav, Shrilekha Mankhair, N. Verma","doi":"10.54905/disssi.v27i141.e382ms3166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The main interest of the current article was to determine and investigate the effects of Dexmedetomidine in comparison to Midazolam required for sedation of the patients on Mechanical ventilation in Neurology ICU as sedative agents using RASS (Richmond Agitation sedation scale) to assess sedation level. The time required for the extubation of the patients after stopping two sedatives was compared between the two groups. Material and methods: This was a randomized, prospective, and comparative study conducted on the patients of ASA classes II and III who were on mechanical ventilators requiring sedation in Neurology ICU from the period October 2021 to April 2022 at the Department of Anaesthesia, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Acharya Vinoba Bhave rural hospital (AVBRH), Sawangi, Meghe. All the patients were more than 18 years and less than 70 years old. Results: The time to achieve the target sedation range was statistically significant. In group A, the patient's time taken was 10.36 minutes as compared to 7.43 minutes in group B. The difference between the two groups concerning the time required for extubation was statistically significant. The time needed for extubating the patient after stopping Midazolam was more than the Dexmedetomidine group. Conclusion: In comparing two sedative drugs, it was found that Dexmedetomidine as a sedative resulted in early weaning from the mechanical ventilator compared to Midazolam in ICU Patients. However, Dexmedetomidine was found to have more occurrences of hypotension and bradycardia as compared to Midazolam.","PeriodicalId":18393,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science","volume":"106 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Dexmedetomidine and Midazolam for sedation in Mechanically ventilated patients in Neurology ICU setup\",\"authors\":\"Jui A Jadhav, Shrilekha Mankhair, N. Verma\",\"doi\":\"10.54905/disssi.v27i141.e382ms3166\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: The main interest of the current article was to determine and investigate the effects of Dexmedetomidine in comparison to Midazolam required for sedation of the patients on Mechanical ventilation in Neurology ICU as sedative agents using RASS (Richmond Agitation sedation scale) to assess sedation level. The time required for the extubation of the patients after stopping two sedatives was compared between the two groups. Material and methods: This was a randomized, prospective, and comparative study conducted on the patients of ASA classes II and III who were on mechanical ventilators requiring sedation in Neurology ICU from the period October 2021 to April 2022 at the Department of Anaesthesia, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Acharya Vinoba Bhave rural hospital (AVBRH), Sawangi, Meghe. All the patients were more than 18 years and less than 70 years old. Results: The time to achieve the target sedation range was statistically significant. In group A, the patient's time taken was 10.36 minutes as compared to 7.43 minutes in group B. The difference between the two groups concerning the time required for extubation was statistically significant. The time needed for extubating the patient after stopping Midazolam was more than the Dexmedetomidine group. Conclusion: In comparing two sedative drugs, it was found that Dexmedetomidine as a sedative resulted in early weaning from the mechanical ventilator compared to Midazolam in ICU Patients. However, Dexmedetomidine was found to have more occurrences of hypotension and bradycardia as compared to Midazolam.\",\"PeriodicalId\":18393,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Science\",\"volume\":\"106 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54905/disssi.v27i141.e382ms3166\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54905/disssi.v27i141.e382ms3166","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介本文的主要目的是使用里士满躁动镇静量表(RASS)评估镇静水平,确定并研究右美托咪定与咪达唑仑作为镇静剂对神经内科重症监护室机械通气患者的镇静效果对比。比较两组患者在停用两种镇静剂后拔管所需的时间。材料与方法这是一项随机、前瞻性的比较研究,研究对象是 2021 年 10 月至 2022 年 4 月期间在梅格赫 Sawangi 的 Jawaharlal Nehru 医学院麻醉系、Acharya Vinoba Bhave 乡村医院(AVBRH)使用机械呼吸机需要镇静的 ASA II 级和 III 级神经病学 ICU 患者。所有患者的年龄都在 18 岁以上、70 岁以下。结果达到目标镇静范围的时间具有统计学意义。A 组患者所用时间为 10.36 分钟,B 组为 7.43 分钟。停用咪达唑仑后拔管所需时间多于右美托咪定组。结论在对两种镇静药物进行比较时发现,与咪达唑仑相比,右美托咪定作为一种镇静药物可使重症监护室患者尽早脱离机械呼吸机。然而,与咪达唑仑相比,右美托咪定出现低血压和心动过缓的情况更多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparison of Dexmedetomidine and Midazolam for sedation in Mechanically ventilated patients in Neurology ICU setup
Introduction: The main interest of the current article was to determine and investigate the effects of Dexmedetomidine in comparison to Midazolam required for sedation of the patients on Mechanical ventilation in Neurology ICU as sedative agents using RASS (Richmond Agitation sedation scale) to assess sedation level. The time required for the extubation of the patients after stopping two sedatives was compared between the two groups. Material and methods: This was a randomized, prospective, and comparative study conducted on the patients of ASA classes II and III who were on mechanical ventilators requiring sedation in Neurology ICU from the period October 2021 to April 2022 at the Department of Anaesthesia, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Acharya Vinoba Bhave rural hospital (AVBRH), Sawangi, Meghe. All the patients were more than 18 years and less than 70 years old. Results: The time to achieve the target sedation range was statistically significant. In group A, the patient's time taken was 10.36 minutes as compared to 7.43 minutes in group B. The difference between the two groups concerning the time required for extubation was statistically significant. The time needed for extubating the patient after stopping Midazolam was more than the Dexmedetomidine group. Conclusion: In comparing two sedative drugs, it was found that Dexmedetomidine as a sedative resulted in early weaning from the mechanical ventilator compared to Midazolam in ICU Patients. However, Dexmedetomidine was found to have more occurrences of hypotension and bradycardia as compared to Midazolam.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Science
Medical Science MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
自引率
20.00%
发文量
439
期刊最新文献
Associated risk factors of Poly Cystic Ovarian disease in gynecologist refer; King Saud Medical City Riyadh Saudi Arabia Prevalence and awareness of hypertension among the shopkeepers working in the market in Northern Border Province of Saudi Arabia Imam Abdurrahman Alfaisal Hospital referred cases characteristics and outcomes Association of nurse team level with patient outcome: Systematic review The impact of mouth rinses on the efficacy of fluoride dentifrices in preventing enamel and dentin erosion/abrasion
×
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