口服普瑞巴林和加巴喷丁用于术后镇痛效果的随机对照试验

IF 0.1 Q4 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Journal of the Scientific Society Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.4103/jss.jss_182_22
T. Prasad, Pavithra Prabu, K. Priyadharsini
{"title":"口服普瑞巴林和加巴喷丁用于术后镇痛效果的随机对照试验","authors":"T. Prasad, Pavithra Prabu, K. Priyadharsini","doi":"10.4103/jss.jss_182_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Modern anesthesia practice utilizes preemptive analgesia for providing pain relief postoperatively using oral drugs such as pregabalin and gabapentin which are otherwise used for chronic pain management. We aimed to determine which among the two is more proficient. Materials and Methods: This randomized double-blinded control study was done among 72 subjects undergoing lower abdominal surgeries under the subarachnoid block and they were randomly divided into three groups: Group 1 received a single dose of tablet pregabalin 150 mg orally, Group 2 received tablet gabapentin 600 mg orally, and Group 3 received placebo drug orally (tablet B-complex) 2 h before subarachnoid block. Pain scores, time of 1st rescue analgesic, total number of rescue analgesics, sedation score, and occurrence of side effects were also noted for 24 h. The data were analyzed using SPSS 16 with Chi-square/Fisher's exact test or analysis of variance/Kruskal–Wallis test. A statistically significant difference was considered when P < 0.05. Results: Pain scores were lesser in Group 1 and 2 except at 2nd h. Total rescue analgesic time among maximum subjects in Group 1 was 4 h 30 min, in Group 2 was 3 h 30 min and 4 h, whereas in Group 3 was 3 h (P < 0.001). The total dose of analgesics in the first 24 h was 2 doses in Group 1, 2 doses in Group 2, and 3 doses in Group 3 (P < 0.001). Sedation score was more on Group 1 and 2 in comparison to Group 3 with no side effects in all groups. Conclusions: We conclude that pregabalin to be the effective preemptive drug because of its lesser pain intensity scores and good sedation property.","PeriodicalId":55681,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Scientific Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A randomized trial comparing the efficacy of oral preemptive pregabalin and gabapentin for postoperative analgesia\",\"authors\":\"T. Prasad, Pavithra Prabu, K. Priyadharsini\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jss.jss_182_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Modern anesthesia practice utilizes preemptive analgesia for providing pain relief postoperatively using oral drugs such as pregabalin and gabapentin which are otherwise used for chronic pain management. We aimed to determine which among the two is more proficient. Materials and Methods: This randomized double-blinded control study was done among 72 subjects undergoing lower abdominal surgeries under the subarachnoid block and they were randomly divided into three groups: Group 1 received a single dose of tablet pregabalin 150 mg orally, Group 2 received tablet gabapentin 600 mg orally, and Group 3 received placebo drug orally (tablet B-complex) 2 h before subarachnoid block. Pain scores, time of 1st rescue analgesic, total number of rescue analgesics, sedation score, and occurrence of side effects were also noted for 24 h. The data were analyzed using SPSS 16 with Chi-square/Fisher's exact test or analysis of variance/Kruskal–Wallis test. A statistically significant difference was considered when P < 0.05. Results: Pain scores were lesser in Group 1 and 2 except at 2nd h. Total rescue analgesic time among maximum subjects in Group 1 was 4 h 30 min, in Group 2 was 3 h 30 min and 4 h, whereas in Group 3 was 3 h (P < 0.001). The total dose of analgesics in the first 24 h was 2 doses in Group 1, 2 doses in Group 2, and 3 doses in Group 3 (P < 0.001). Sedation score was more on Group 1 and 2 in comparison to Group 3 with no side effects in all groups. Conclusions: We conclude that pregabalin to be the effective preemptive drug because of its lesser pain intensity scores and good sedation property.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55681,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Scientific Society\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Scientific Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jss.jss_182_22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Scientific Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jss.jss_182_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:现代麻醉实践利用预先镇痛来提供术后疼痛缓解,使用口服药物,如普瑞巴林和加巴喷丁,这些药物在其他方面用于慢性疼痛管理。我们的目的是确定两者中哪一个更熟练。材料与方法:对72例蛛网膜下腔阻滞下腹部手术的受试者进行随机双盲对照研究,并将其随机分为三组:第一组口服普瑞巴林150mg单剂量片剂,第二组口服加巴喷丁600mg片剂,第3组在蛛网膜下腔阻滞前2小时口服安慰剂(片剂B复合体)。还记录了24小时的疼痛评分、第一次抢救性镇痛药的时间、抢救性镇痛剂的总数、镇静评分和副作用的发生情况。使用SPSS 16通过卡方/Fisher精确检验或方差分析/Kruskal–Wallis检验对数据进行分析。当P<0.05时,认为有统计学意义的差异。结果:除第2小时外,第1组和第2组的疼痛评分较低。第1组最大受试者的总抢救镇痛时间为4小时30分钟,第2组为3小时30分钟和4小时,而第3组为3 h(P<0.001),第3组为3剂(P<0.001)。与第3组相比,第1组和第2组的镇静得分更高,所有组均无副作用。结论:普瑞巴林是一种有效的先发制人的药物,因为它具有较低的疼痛强度评分和良好的镇静性能。
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
A randomized trial comparing the efficacy of oral preemptive pregabalin and gabapentin for postoperative analgesia
Background: Modern anesthesia practice utilizes preemptive analgesia for providing pain relief postoperatively using oral drugs such as pregabalin and gabapentin which are otherwise used for chronic pain management. We aimed to determine which among the two is more proficient. Materials and Methods: This randomized double-blinded control study was done among 72 subjects undergoing lower abdominal surgeries under the subarachnoid block and they were randomly divided into three groups: Group 1 received a single dose of tablet pregabalin 150 mg orally, Group 2 received tablet gabapentin 600 mg orally, and Group 3 received placebo drug orally (tablet B-complex) 2 h before subarachnoid block. Pain scores, time of 1st rescue analgesic, total number of rescue analgesics, sedation score, and occurrence of side effects were also noted for 24 h. The data were analyzed using SPSS 16 with Chi-square/Fisher's exact test or analysis of variance/Kruskal–Wallis test. A statistically significant difference was considered when P < 0.05. Results: Pain scores were lesser in Group 1 and 2 except at 2nd h. Total rescue analgesic time among maximum subjects in Group 1 was 4 h 30 min, in Group 2 was 3 h 30 min and 4 h, whereas in Group 3 was 3 h (P < 0.001). The total dose of analgesics in the first 24 h was 2 doses in Group 1, 2 doses in Group 2, and 3 doses in Group 3 (P < 0.001). Sedation score was more on Group 1 and 2 in comparison to Group 3 with no side effects in all groups. Conclusions: We conclude that pregabalin to be the effective preemptive drug because of its lesser pain intensity scores and good sedation property.
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
Journal of the Scientific Society
Journal of the Scientific Society MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
自引率
33.30%
发文量
19
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊最新文献
A Paradigm Shift in Prosthodontics: Analog to Digital Proportion of Urinary Tract Infection in Children between 6 Months to 5 Years of Age Presenting with Fever Renal Manifestation of Mixed Connective Tissue Disease The Study of COVID-19 Infection in Health-Care Workers Post-COVID Vaccination Physical Fitness in Children with Thalassemia Major Measured With 6-min Walk Test
×
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