雾化利多卡因与气管内注射(随用随喷)利多卡因在支气管镜检查中减轻疼痛和咳嗽的比较。

Q3 Medicine Tanaffos Pub Date : 2022-03-01
Saeid Islamitabar, Mohammad Gholizadeh, Mohammad Hasan Rakhshani, Asghar Kazemzadeh, MoosaalReza Tadayonfar
{"title":"雾化利多卡因与气管内注射(随用随喷)利多卡因在支气管镜检查中减轻疼痛和咳嗽的比较。","authors":"Saeid Islamitabar,&nbsp;Mohammad Gholizadeh,&nbsp;Mohammad Hasan Rakhshani,&nbsp;Asghar Kazemzadeh,&nbsp;MoosaalReza Tadayonfar","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients undergoing bronchoscopy often suffer from pain, coughing, and suffocation. Therefore, lidocaine is prescribed through various methods to induce local anesthesia. This study aimed to compare nebulized lidocaine and intratracheally injected lidocaine in pain and cough reduction during bronchoscopy.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This clinical trial was performed on 96 patients, divided into two groups of intervention (receiving lidocaine via a nebulizer before bronchoscopy) and control (receiving lidocaine through the working channel of bronchoscope). Then, the patients᾽ cough frequency was recorded during the procedure, and the pain level was measured using a numerical rating scale at the end of the procedure. The data were analyzed with SPSS software (version 16) using the chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. Moreover, the linear and Poisson regression tests were applied to analyze the main variables in this study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding demographic characteristics (P>0.05). Moreover, the linear regression test revealed that the intervention (nebulized lidocaine) group had significantly lower pain scores (1.54±0.08) than the control (intratracheally injected lidocaine) group (2.5±0.26) (P=0.013). In addition, the Poisson regression test showed a statistically significant difference between the intervention (35.22±2.93) and control (48.85±5.96) groups in terms of cough frequency (P<0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study indicated that nebulized lidocaine has higher efficacy in reducing the patients᾽ pain and cough during bronchoscopy than intratracheally injected lidocaine.</p>","PeriodicalId":22247,"journal":{"name":"Tanaffos","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/5b/c7/Tanaffos-21-348.PMC10073944.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Nebulized Lidocaine and Intratracheally Injected (Spray-as-you-go) Lidocaine in Pain and Cough Reduction during Bronchoscopy.\",\"authors\":\"Saeid Islamitabar,&nbsp;Mohammad Gholizadeh,&nbsp;Mohammad Hasan Rakhshani,&nbsp;Asghar Kazemzadeh,&nbsp;MoosaalReza Tadayonfar\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients undergoing bronchoscopy often suffer from pain, coughing, and suffocation. Therefore, lidocaine is prescribed through various methods to induce local anesthesia. This study aimed to compare nebulized lidocaine and intratracheally injected lidocaine in pain and cough reduction during bronchoscopy.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This clinical trial was performed on 96 patients, divided into two groups of intervention (receiving lidocaine via a nebulizer before bronchoscopy) and control (receiving lidocaine through the working channel of bronchoscope). Then, the patients᾽ cough frequency was recorded during the procedure, and the pain level was measured using a numerical rating scale at the end of the procedure. The data were analyzed with SPSS software (version 16) using the chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. Moreover, the linear and Poisson regression tests were applied to analyze the main variables in this study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding demographic characteristics (P>0.05). Moreover, the linear regression test revealed that the intervention (nebulized lidocaine) group had significantly lower pain scores (1.54±0.08) than the control (intratracheally injected lidocaine) group (2.5±0.26) (P=0.013). In addition, the Poisson regression test showed a statistically significant difference between the intervention (35.22±2.93) and control (48.85±5.96) groups in terms of cough frequency (P<0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study indicated that nebulized lidocaine has higher efficacy in reducing the patients᾽ pain and cough during bronchoscopy than intratracheally injected lidocaine.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22247,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Tanaffos\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/5b/c7/Tanaffos-21-348.PMC10073944.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Tanaffos\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tanaffos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:接受支气管镜检查的患者经常出现疼痛、咳嗽和窒息。因此,利多卡因通过各种方法开处方来诱导局部麻醉。本研究旨在比较雾化利多卡因和气管内注射利多卡因在支气管镜检查中减轻疼痛和咳嗽的效果。材料与方法:本临床试验共96例患者,分为干预组(支气管镜检查前雾化吸入利多卡因组)和对照组(支气管镜工作通道吸入利多卡因组)。然后在治疗过程中记录患者的咳嗽频率,并在治疗结束时用数值评定量表测量疼痛程度。使用SPSS软件(version 16)进行数据分析,采用卡方检验和Fisher精确检验。采用线性回归检验和泊松回归检验对主要变量进行分析。结果:两组患者人口学特征比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。线性回归检验显示,干预组(雾化利多卡因组)疼痛评分(1.54±0.08)明显低于对照组(气管内注射利多卡因组)(2.5±0.26)(P=0.013)。泊松回归检验显示,干预组(35.22±2.93)与对照组(48.85±5.96)咳嗽频率差异有统计学意义(p)。结论:本研究表明,雾化利多卡因在缓解患者支气管镜检查时的疼痛和咳嗽方面比气管内注射利多卡因有更高的疗效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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 Nebulized Lidocaine and Intratracheally Injected (Spray-as-you-go) Lidocaine in Pain and Cough Reduction during Bronchoscopy.

Background: Patients undergoing bronchoscopy often suffer from pain, coughing, and suffocation. Therefore, lidocaine is prescribed through various methods to induce local anesthesia. This study aimed to compare nebulized lidocaine and intratracheally injected lidocaine in pain and cough reduction during bronchoscopy.

Materials and methods: This clinical trial was performed on 96 patients, divided into two groups of intervention (receiving lidocaine via a nebulizer before bronchoscopy) and control (receiving lidocaine through the working channel of bronchoscope). Then, the patients᾽ cough frequency was recorded during the procedure, and the pain level was measured using a numerical rating scale at the end of the procedure. The data were analyzed with SPSS software (version 16) using the chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. Moreover, the linear and Poisson regression tests were applied to analyze the main variables in this study.

Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding demographic characteristics (P>0.05). Moreover, the linear regression test revealed that the intervention (nebulized lidocaine) group had significantly lower pain scores (1.54±0.08) than the control (intratracheally injected lidocaine) group (2.5±0.26) (P=0.013). In addition, the Poisson regression test showed a statistically significant difference between the intervention (35.22±2.93) and control (48.85±5.96) groups in terms of cough frequency (P<0.0001).

Conclusion: This study indicated that nebulized lidocaine has higher efficacy in reducing the patients᾽ pain and cough during bronchoscopy than intratracheally injected lidocaine.

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
Tanaffos
Tanaffos Medicine-Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Oncologic Emergencies in Lung Cancer Patients and the Effects of SARS-COV2 Pandemic. Relationship between Underlying Diseases with Morbidity and Mortality in Patients with COVID-19. Status of Inflammatory and Coagulation Factors in COVID-19 and Its Relation with the Disease Severity. Tracheal Lobular Capillary Hemangioma: A Rare Localization. Tracheal Small Cell Carcinoma in a 52-year-old Male: A Case Report.
×
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