手臂和前臂双止血带在上肢远端手术中镇痛开始和持续时间、止血带疼痛以及感觉和运动恢复方面的比较:一项随机临床试验

IF 0.2 Q4 ANESTHESIOLOGY Indian Anaesthetists Forum Pub Date : 2021-07-01 DOI:10.4103/TheIAForum.TheIAForum_70_21
H. Modir, Esmail Moshiri, Amirreza Modir, Saide Shakeri, Amir Moradi
{"title":"手臂和前臂双止血带在上肢远端手术中镇痛开始和持续时间、止血带疼痛以及感觉和运动恢复方面的比较:一项随机临床试验","authors":"H. Modir, Esmail Moshiri, Amirreza Modir, Saide Shakeri, Amir Moradi","doi":"10.4103/TheIAForum.TheIAForum_70_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aims: The current study aimed at comparing arm and forearm double tourniquet in terms of the onset and duration of analgesia, tourniquet pain, and the return of sensation and movement in distal upper extremity surgery. Methods: This double-blind clinical trial was performed on 70 patients who were candidates for distal upper extremity orthopedic surgeries. The patients were randomized into two groups of arm and forearm double tourniquet. The onset time and duration of sensory and motor blocks were recorded. The pain level was recorded by visual Analog Scale (VAS) after inflating the tourniquet every 15 min till the end of operation at 15, 30, and 45 min as well as every 30 min for 2 h (at 30, 60, 90, and 120 min.) and at 6, 12, and 24 h after deflating the tourniquet. SPSS version 20 was used to analyze the data. Results: During 8–24 h after the surgery, the pain in arm double- tourniquet group was less than that in the other group (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the time to onset of sensory–motor block between the two groups (P > 0.05). The duration of sensory block in arm double tourniquet was longer than that in forearm double tourniquet group (P = 0.002). In addition, the duration of motor block in arm double tourniquet was also longer than that in forearm double tourniquet group (P = 0.001). The pain level was equal in both the groups at all times except for the time interval of 8–24 h after the operation in arm double tourniquet group. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference in the pain level, and the time to onset of sensory–motor block was the same in both the groups as well. However, the duration of sensory–motor block was longer in the arm double tourniquet group, while no complication was found in either group. Conclusion: Both the techniques are applicable in hand and distal upper extremity surgeries provided that the surgical duration is not too long. Using forearm double tourniquet technique is preferable to arm double tourniquet, but the surgical duration should not exceed 60 min. That is because less amount of anesthetic drugs is needed in forearm double tourniquet technique, hence leading to a decrease in the potential side effects.","PeriodicalId":42359,"journal":{"name":"Indian Anaesthetists Forum","volume":"22 1","pages":"169 - 175"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The comparison of arm and forearm double tourniquet in terms of the onset and duration of analgesia, tourniquet pain, and the return of sensation and movement in distal upper extremity surgery: A randomized clinical trial\",\"authors\":\"H. Modir, Esmail Moshiri, Amirreza Modir, Saide Shakeri, Amir Moradi\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/TheIAForum.TheIAForum_70_21\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aims: The current study aimed at comparing arm and forearm double tourniquet in terms of the onset and duration of analgesia, tourniquet pain, and the return of sensation and movement in distal upper extremity surgery. Methods: This double-blind clinical trial was performed on 70 patients who were candidates for distal upper extremity orthopedic surgeries. The patients were randomized into two groups of arm and forearm double tourniquet. The onset time and duration of sensory and motor blocks were recorded. The pain level was recorded by visual Analog Scale (VAS) after inflating the tourniquet every 15 min till the end of operation at 15, 30, and 45 min as well as every 30 min for 2 h (at 30, 60, 90, and 120 min.) and at 6, 12, and 24 h after deflating the tourniquet. SPSS version 20 was used to analyze the data. Results: During 8–24 h after the surgery, the pain in arm double- tourniquet group was less than that in the other group (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the time to onset of sensory–motor block between the two groups (P > 0.05). The duration of sensory block in arm double tourniquet was longer than that in forearm double tourniquet group (P = 0.002). In addition, the duration of motor block in arm double tourniquet was also longer than that in forearm double tourniquet group (P = 0.001). The pain level was equal in both the groups at all times except for the time interval of 8–24 h after the operation in arm double tourniquet group. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference in the pain level, and the time to onset of sensory–motor block was the same in both the groups as well. However, the duration of sensory–motor block was longer in the arm double tourniquet group, while no complication was found in either group. Conclusion: Both the techniques are applicable in hand and distal upper extremity surgeries provided that the surgical duration is not too long. Using forearm double tourniquet technique is preferable to arm double tourniquet, but the surgical duration should not exceed 60 min. That is because less amount of anesthetic drugs is needed in forearm double tourniquet technique, hence leading to a decrease in the potential side effects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42359,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Anaesthetists Forum\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"169 - 175\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Anaesthetists Forum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/TheIAForum.TheIAForum_70_21\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Anaesthetists Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/TheIAForum.TheIAForum_70_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在比较上肢远端手术中手臂和前臂双止血带在镇痛的开始时间和持续时间、止血带疼痛以及感觉和运动恢复方面的差异。方法:对70例上肢远端矫形手术候诊患者进行双盲临床试验。患者随机分为手臂和前臂双止血带两组。记录感觉和运动阻滞的发生时间和持续时间。用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)记录止血带充气后每15分钟至15、30、45分钟的疼痛程度,以及每30分钟充气2小时(30、60、90、120分钟)和放血带后6、12、24小时的疼痛程度。采用SPSS version 20对数据进行分析。结果:术后8 ~ 24 h,手臂双止血带组疼痛明显小于另一组(P < 0.05)。两组感觉运动阻滞发生时间比较,差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。手臂双止血带组感觉阻滞时间明显长于前臂双止血带组(P = 0.002)。此外,手臂双止血带组运动阻滞持续时间也长于前臂双止血带组(P = 0.001)。除手臂双止血带组术后8 ~ 24h时间间隔外,两组疼痛程度均相等。此外,两组在疼痛程度上无统计学差异,感觉-运动阻滞的发生时间也相同。而手臂双止血带组感觉运动阻滞时间较长,两组均无并发症发生。结论:在手术时间不太长的情况下,两种技术均适用于手部和上肢远端手术。前臂双止血带技术优于手臂双止血带技术,但手术时间不应超过60分钟。这是因为前臂双止血带技术所需麻醉药物较少,因此潜在的副作用减少。
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
The comparison of arm and forearm double tourniquet in terms of the onset and duration of analgesia, tourniquet pain, and the return of sensation and movement in distal upper extremity surgery: A randomized clinical trial
Aims: The current study aimed at comparing arm and forearm double tourniquet in terms of the onset and duration of analgesia, tourniquet pain, and the return of sensation and movement in distal upper extremity surgery. Methods: This double-blind clinical trial was performed on 70 patients who were candidates for distal upper extremity orthopedic surgeries. The patients were randomized into two groups of arm and forearm double tourniquet. The onset time and duration of sensory and motor blocks were recorded. The pain level was recorded by visual Analog Scale (VAS) after inflating the tourniquet every 15 min till the end of operation at 15, 30, and 45 min as well as every 30 min for 2 h (at 30, 60, 90, and 120 min.) and at 6, 12, and 24 h after deflating the tourniquet. SPSS version 20 was used to analyze the data. Results: During 8–24 h after the surgery, the pain in arm double- tourniquet group was less than that in the other group (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the time to onset of sensory–motor block between the two groups (P > 0.05). The duration of sensory block in arm double tourniquet was longer than that in forearm double tourniquet group (P = 0.002). In addition, the duration of motor block in arm double tourniquet was also longer than that in forearm double tourniquet group (P = 0.001). The pain level was equal in both the groups at all times except for the time interval of 8–24 h after the operation in arm double tourniquet group. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference in the pain level, and the time to onset of sensory–motor block was the same in both the groups as well. However, the duration of sensory–motor block was longer in the arm double tourniquet group, while no complication was found in either group. Conclusion: Both the techniques are applicable in hand and distal upper extremity surgeries provided that the surgical duration is not too long. Using forearm double tourniquet technique is preferable to arm double tourniquet, but the surgical duration should not exceed 60 min. That is because less amount of anesthetic drugs is needed in forearm double tourniquet technique, hence leading to a decrease in the potential side effects.
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
Indian Anaesthetists Forum
Indian Anaesthetists Forum ANESTHESIOLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Cardiovascular complications in coronavirus disease-2019 patients Refractory hypokalemia in intensive care unit: Efforts in vain Evaluation of effect of dexamethasone and bicarbonate as adjuvants to intracuff lignocaine on endotracheal tube tolerance during emergence and incidence of postoperative cough and sore throat Is it popliteal artery? Is it popliteal vein? No it is persistent sciatic vein Mortality predictors during the third wave of COVID-19 pandemic: A multicentric retrospective analysis from tertiary care centers of Western India
×
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