局部渗透镇痛与EMLA皮片减轻脊麻针扎痛的比较研究

Mohd Mudassir Shaikh, Juberahamad Rajjak Attar, S. Khatib, Shreyas Nilkanth Deshmukh
{"title":"局部渗透镇痛与EMLA皮片减轻脊麻针扎痛的比较研究","authors":"Mohd Mudassir Shaikh, Juberahamad Rajjak Attar, S. Khatib, Shreyas Nilkanth Deshmukh","doi":"10.47799/pimr.1101.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract\n \n Introduction: Needle prick pain is a distressing event for a patient receiving spinal anaesthesia. A ‘Needle piercing the spine’ might be physically and mentally traumatizing for many patients. This may lead to unwanted panic and anxiety during the procedure of spinal anaesthesia. To avoid this distressing needle prick pain, many clinicians have resorted to the practice of giving injections of local anaesthetic or local application of EMLA cream or patch at the site of spinal puncture beforehand for anaesthetizing the skin and subcutaneous tissues. \n \n Methods: A prospective cohort study was done. Those enrolled patients were assessed by an expert anesthesiologist, who was not part of the research team, and he prescribed patients either EMLA cream or regular standard lignocaine infiltration anaesthesia and labelled them as Group E and Group L respectively. The pain score was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale. \n \n Result: A total of 64 patients were enrolled in the study- 33 in Group E and 31 in Group L. Both groups had an almost similar number of patients who had a similar extent of surgery. Univariate analysis showed that the mean pain score (VAS) was significantly higher in Group E patients compared to that in Group L, p<0.001. The multivariate analysis had similar findings after controlling confounding factors in multiple regression analysis. \n \n Conclusion: Local 2% lignocaine injection achieved significantly more pain reduction during spinal needle insertion compared to the application of an EMLA patch before spinal anaesthesia.","PeriodicalId":30624,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives In Medical Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative study of attenuation of needle prick pain of spinal anaesthesia by local infiltration analgesia versus EMLA skin patch\",\"authors\":\"Mohd Mudassir Shaikh, Juberahamad Rajjak Attar, S. Khatib, Shreyas Nilkanth Deshmukh\",\"doi\":\"10.47799/pimr.1101.04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract\\n \\n Introduction: Needle prick pain is a distressing event for a patient receiving spinal anaesthesia. A ‘Needle piercing the spine’ might be physically and mentally traumatizing for many patients. This may lead to unwanted panic and anxiety during the procedure of spinal anaesthesia. To avoid this distressing needle prick pain, many clinicians have resorted to the practice of giving injections of local anaesthetic or local application of EMLA cream or patch at the site of spinal puncture beforehand for anaesthetizing the skin and subcutaneous tissues. \\n \\n Methods: A prospective cohort study was done. Those enrolled patients were assessed by an expert anesthesiologist, who was not part of the research team, and he prescribed patients either EMLA cream or regular standard lignocaine infiltration anaesthesia and labelled them as Group E and Group L respectively. The pain score was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale. \\n \\n Result: A total of 64 patients were enrolled in the study- 33 in Group E and 31 in Group L. Both groups had an almost similar number of patients who had a similar extent of surgery. Univariate analysis showed that the mean pain score (VAS) was significantly higher in Group E patients compared to that in Group L, p<0.001. The multivariate analysis had similar findings after controlling confounding factors in multiple regression analysis. \\n \\n Conclusion: Local 2% lignocaine injection achieved significantly more pain reduction during spinal needle insertion compared to the application of an EMLA patch before spinal anaesthesia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30624,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perspectives In Medical Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perspectives In Medical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47799/pimr.1101.04\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives In Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47799/pimr.1101.04","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

摘要简介:对于接受脊椎麻醉的患者来说,针刺疼痛是一种令人痛苦的事件。“针刺脊椎”可能会对许多患者造成身心创伤。这可能会导致脊柱麻醉过程中不必要的恐慌和焦虑。为了避免这种令人痛苦的针扎疼痛,许多临床医生采用了预先在脊椎穿刺部位注射局部麻醉剂或局部应用EMLA乳膏或贴剂来麻醉皮肤和皮下组织的做法。方法:进行前瞻性队列研究。这些入选患者由非研究团队成员的专业麻醉师进行评估,他给患者开了EMLA乳膏或常规标准利多卡因渗透麻醉,并将其分别标记为E组和L组。使用视觉模拟量表评估疼痛评分。结果:共有64名患者参与了这项研究——E组33名,L组31名。两组患者的手术程度几乎相似。单变量分析显示,与L组相比,E组患者的平均疼痛评分(VAS)显著较高,p<0.001。在多元回归分析中控制混杂因素后,多变量分析具有相似的结果。结论:与脊髓麻醉前应用EMLA贴剂相比,2%利多卡因局部注射在脊髓针插入过程中可显著减轻疼痛。
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
Comparative study of attenuation of needle prick pain of spinal anaesthesia by local infiltration analgesia versus EMLA skin patch
Abstract Introduction: Needle prick pain is a distressing event for a patient receiving spinal anaesthesia. A ‘Needle piercing the spine’ might be physically and mentally traumatizing for many patients. This may lead to unwanted panic and anxiety during the procedure of spinal anaesthesia. To avoid this distressing needle prick pain, many clinicians have resorted to the practice of giving injections of local anaesthetic or local application of EMLA cream or patch at the site of spinal puncture beforehand for anaesthetizing the skin and subcutaneous tissues. Methods: A prospective cohort study was done. Those enrolled patients were assessed by an expert anesthesiologist, who was not part of the research team, and he prescribed patients either EMLA cream or regular standard lignocaine infiltration anaesthesia and labelled them as Group E and Group L respectively. The pain score was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale. Result: A total of 64 patients were enrolled in the study- 33 in Group E and 31 in Group L. Both groups had an almost similar number of patients who had a similar extent of surgery. Univariate analysis showed that the mean pain score (VAS) was significantly higher in Group E patients compared to that in Group L, p<0.001. The multivariate analysis had similar findings after controlling confounding factors in multiple regression analysis. Conclusion: Local 2% lignocaine injection achieved significantly more pain reduction during spinal needle insertion compared to the application of an EMLA patch before spinal anaesthesia.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Assessment of peripheral lymph node tuberculosis: a prospective study of 24 cases Histopathological study on the spectrum of various sinonasal lesions Socio-demographic correlates and psychosocial stressors among suicide attempters attending a tertiary care general hospital Radiological study of foramen arcuale: implications for screw insertion via posterior arch for fixation of C1 vertebrae in atlantoaxial instability using plain radiograph Artificial Intelligence and Computational Pathology: A comprehensive review of advancements and applications
×
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