Jessica K. Lee , Anne E. Burke , Katrina Thaler , Jennifer A. Robinson , Carolyn Sufrin
{"title":"口服镇静治疗宫颈扩张器置入疼痛:一项随机对照试验","authors":"Jessica K. Lee , Anne E. Burke , Katrina Thaler , Jennifer A. Robinson , Carolyn Sufrin","doi":"10.1016/j.conx.2020.100053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Assess oral sedation versus placebo for pain control with cervical dilator placement.</p></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><p>We randomized participants presenting for dilation and evacuation to lorazepam 1 mg/oxycodone 5 mg or placebo 45 min before cervical dilator placement. Our primary outcome was median visual analog scale (VAS) pain score after dilator placement using a 100-mm VAS. We used our outcome data to calculate median pain score changes from baseline to better reflect pain score differences between study groups. Planned sample size was 30 participants per group, for a total of 60.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We randomized 27 participants; 9 received sedation and 11 placebo. Median pain score increase from baseline to last dilator placement was 20 [interquartile range (IQR) 8–29] and 31 (IQR 15–81) in the oral sedation and placebo groups, p = .16.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>We were unable to enroll our desired sample size, and our sample is underpowered to make any conclusions. Our results suggest that oral sedation may provide some benefit for pain relief with dilator insertion and indicate that further research might be worthwhile especially in settings that do not routinely provide these analgesics.</p></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><p>We had difficulty with study recruitment because many patients desired oral sedation for pain management for cervical dilator placement and declined randomization. Randomized trials of pain management with a placebo arm may find recruitment challenging especially if default clinical care already includes a pain management option that patients would have to opt out of.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10655,"journal":{"name":"Contraception: X","volume":"3 ","pages":"Article 100053"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.conx.2020.100053","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Oral sedation for pain with cervical dilator placement: a randomized controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"Jessica K. Lee , Anne E. Burke , Katrina Thaler , Jennifer A. Robinson , Carolyn Sufrin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.conx.2020.100053\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Assess oral sedation versus placebo for pain control with cervical dilator placement.</p></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><p>We randomized participants presenting for dilation and evacuation to lorazepam 1 mg/oxycodone 5 mg or placebo 45 min before cervical dilator placement. Our primary outcome was median visual analog scale (VAS) pain score after dilator placement using a 100-mm VAS. We used our outcome data to calculate median pain score changes from baseline to better reflect pain score differences between study groups. Planned sample size was 30 participants per group, for a total of 60.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We randomized 27 participants; 9 received sedation and 11 placebo. Median pain score increase from baseline to last dilator placement was 20 [interquartile range (IQR) 8–29] and 31 (IQR 15–81) in the oral sedation and placebo groups, p = .16.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>We were unable to enroll our desired sample size, and our sample is underpowered to make any conclusions. Our results suggest that oral sedation may provide some benefit for pain relief with dilator insertion and indicate that further research might be worthwhile especially in settings that do not routinely provide these analgesics.</p></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><p>We had difficulty with study recruitment because many patients desired oral sedation for pain management for cervical dilator placement and declined randomization. Randomized trials of pain management with a placebo arm may find recruitment challenging especially if default clinical care already includes a pain management option that patients would have to opt out of.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10655,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contraception: X\",\"volume\":\"3 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100053\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.conx.2020.100053\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contraception: X\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590151620300368\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contraception: X","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590151620300368","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的评估口服镇静与安慰剂在宫颈扩张器置入后疼痛控制中的作用。研究设计:在宫颈扩张器放置前,我们随机分组接受劳拉西泮1 mg/羟考酮5 mg或安慰剂45 min的扩张和疏散治疗。我们的主要结局是使用100毫米视觉模拟评分(VAS)测量扩张器放置后的中位疼痛评分。我们使用结果数据计算疼痛评分中位数从基线的变化,以更好地反映研究组之间疼痛评分的差异。计划样本量为每组30人,总共60人。结果随机选取27例受试者;镇静组9例,安慰剂组11例。口服镇静组和安慰剂组从基线到最后一次扩张器放置的疼痛评分中位数增加为20[四分位数间距(IQR) 8-29]和31 (IQR 15-81), p = .16。我们无法招募到我们想要的样本量,而且我们的样本量不足以得出任何结论。我们的研究结果表明口服镇静可能对置入扩张器的疼痛缓解有一定的好处,并表明进一步的研究可能是值得的,特别是在没有常规提供这些镇痛药的环境中。我们在招募研究时遇到困难,因为许多患者在放置宫颈扩张器时需要口服镇静来缓解疼痛,因此拒绝随机分组。用安慰剂组进行疼痛管理的随机试验可能会发现招募具有挑战性,特别是如果默认的临床护理已经包括患者必须选择退出的疼痛管理选项。
Oral sedation for pain with cervical dilator placement: a randomized controlled trial
Objective
Assess oral sedation versus placebo for pain control with cervical dilator placement.
Study design
We randomized participants presenting for dilation and evacuation to lorazepam 1 mg/oxycodone 5 mg or placebo 45 min before cervical dilator placement. Our primary outcome was median visual analog scale (VAS) pain score after dilator placement using a 100-mm VAS. We used our outcome data to calculate median pain score changes from baseline to better reflect pain score differences between study groups. Planned sample size was 30 participants per group, for a total of 60.
Results
We randomized 27 participants; 9 received sedation and 11 placebo. Median pain score increase from baseline to last dilator placement was 20 [interquartile range (IQR) 8–29] and 31 (IQR 15–81) in the oral sedation and placebo groups, p = .16.
Conclusion
We were unable to enroll our desired sample size, and our sample is underpowered to make any conclusions. Our results suggest that oral sedation may provide some benefit for pain relief with dilator insertion and indicate that further research might be worthwhile especially in settings that do not routinely provide these analgesics.
Implications
We had difficulty with study recruitment because many patients desired oral sedation for pain management for cervical dilator placement and declined randomization. Randomized trials of pain management with a placebo arm may find recruitment challenging especially if default clinical care already includes a pain management option that patients would have to opt out of.