Comparison of the effects of lidocaine pre-administration and local warming of the intravenous access site on propofol injection pain: Randomized, double-blind controlled trial

被引:14
|
作者
Jeong, Meejeong [1 ]
Yoon, Haesang [2 ]
机构
[1] Natl Canc Ctr, Dept Nursing, Goyang Si, Gyeonggi Do, South Korea
[2] Gachon Univ, Coll Nursing, Younsoodong 534-2, Inchon 406812, South Korea
关键词
Lidocaine; Local hyperthermia; Noticeptive pain; Pain management; Propofol; SURGICAL PLETH INDEX; FORMULATIONS; ANESTHESIA; PREVENTION; INDUCTION; STRESS;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.06.012
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
Background: Lidocaine reduces pain that occurs upon the intravenous injection of propofol. But, there are few non-pharmacological nursing interventions to reduce propofol injection pain. Objective: To compare the effects of lidocaine pre-administration and local warming of the intravenous access site on propofol injection pain. Design: Prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Setting: The 555 bed, non-teaching National Cancer Center in Kyunggido, South Korea. Participants: A total of 96 patients who underwent thyroidectomy under total intravenous general anesthesia with propofol were randomly allocated to the control, lidocaine pre administration (LA) or local warming (LW) group. Methods: All three groups received 2% propofol with an effect-site target at 3 pg/mL for induction dose. The control group received 2% propofol with no intervention. The lidocaine pre-administration group received 2% propofol 30 s after 1% lidocaine 30 mg. The local warming group received 2% propofol after warming of the intravenous access site for 1 min using 43 degrees C forced air. Propofol injection pain was assessed by four-point verbal categorial scoring (VCS), numerical rating scale (NRS) and surgical pleth index (SPI). Results: Pain VCS of the LA group (mean SD, 1.11 +/- 0.45) was significantly reduced (U=-3.92, p < .001) compared to the control group (mean SD, 1.71 +/- 0.74). Pain VCS of the LW group (mean SD, 0.76 +/- 0.44) was significantly reduced (U =-5.17, p < .001) compared to the control group (mean SD, 1.71 +/- 0.74). Pain VCS of the LW group was significantly reduced compared to the LA group (U=-3.33, p =.001]. Pain NRS of the LA group (mean SD, 431 +/- 2.32) was significantly reduced (mean difference, 1.82; 95% CI, 0.63-3.00; p =.003) compared to the control group (mean SD, 6.13 +/- 2.39). Pain NRS of the LW group (mean SD, 3.06 +/- 2.37) was significantly reduced (mean difference, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.63-4.51; p <.009) compared to the control group. There were significant differences in pain NRS between the LA group and the LW group (mean difference, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.09-2.42; p =.035). SPI of the LA group (mean SD, 64.1 +/- 16.3) was significantly reduced (mean difference control versus LA, 836; 95% CI, 1.64-15.1; p =.016) compared to the control group (mean SD, 72.5 9.56). SPI of the LW group (mean SD, 55.0 +/- 16.2) was significantly reduced (mean difference control versus LW, 17.4; 95% CI, 10.8-24.0; p <.001) compared to the control group. There was a significant difference in SPI between the LA group and LW group (mean difference, 9.06; 95% CI, 1.02-17.1; p =.028). Conclusion: Local warming of the intravenous access site by 43 degrees C forced air for 1 min is slightly more effective in reducing propofol injection pain compared to lidocaine pre administration. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:209 / 218
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] A prospective randomised double-blind comparison of propofol-Lipuro® vs propofol with or without lidocaine:: effect on injection pain
    Elliot, SC
    Mallick, A
    Krishnan, K
    Moll, T
    Sengupta, C
    Vyas, D
    Vucevic, M
    ANAESTHESIA, 2006, 61 (01) : 81 - 82
  • [22] Comparison Between Intravenous Nalbuphine and Lidocaine in Reducing Propofol-Induced Injection Pain During Gastroscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial
    Jiang Wang
    Jinjuan Duan
    Cuiyu Xie
    Yongqi Yu
    Yao Lu
    Pain and Therapy, 2020, 9 : 563 - 571
  • [23] Comparison Between Intravenous Nalbuphine and Lidocaine in Reducing Propofol-Induced Injection Pain During Gastroscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial
    Wang, Jiang
    Duan, Jinjuan
    Xie, Cuiyu
    Yu, Yongqi
    Lu, Yao
    PAIN AND THERAPY, 2020, 9 (02) : 563 - 571
  • [24] A prospective, randomized, double-blind study to compare the efficacy of lidocaine + metoclopramide and lidocaine + ketamine combinations in preventing pain on propofol injection
    Kapil Chaudhary
    Pramod Gupta
    Anoop Raj Gogia
    Journal of Anesthesia, 2013, 27 : 402 - 406
  • [25] The effect of total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol on postoperative pain after third molar surgery: A double-blind randomized controlled trial
    Wong, Stanley Sau Ching
    Leung, Mike Yiu Yan
    Cheung, Chi Wai
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PAIN, 2019, 23 (05) : 884 - 893
  • [26] Clinical Efficacy of Intravenous Lidocaine for Thyroidectomy: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial
    Geun Joo Choi
    Hyun Kang
    Eun Jin Ahn
    Jong In Oh
    Chong Wha Baek
    Yong Hun Jung
    Jin Yun Kim
    World Journal of Surgery, 2016, 40 : 2941 - 2947
  • [27] Clinical Efficacy of Intravenous Lidocaine for Thyroidectomy: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial
    Choi, Geun Joo
    Kang, Hyun
    Ahn, Eun Jin
    Oh, Jong In
    Baek, Chong Wha
    Jung, Yong Hun
    Kim, Jin Yun
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2016, 40 (12) : 2941 - 2947
  • [28] Effect of intravenous lidocaine on the incidence of postextubation laryngospasm: A double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial
    Aljonaieh, Khalid Ibrahim
    SAUDI JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2018, 12 (01) : 3 - 9
  • [29] Comparison of propofol-esketamine versus propofol for anesthesia in gastroscopy: a double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial
    Liu, Xiaoli
    Xiao, Qingyu
    Zhuang, Shaohui
    FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE, 2023, 10
  • [30] Gabapentin Pretreatment for Propofol and Rocuronium Injection Pain: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study
    Cakirgoz, M. Y.
    Demirel, I.
    Duran, E.
    Ozer, A. B.
    Turkmen, U. A.
    Ersoy, A.
    Aksu, A.
    Hanci, V.
    NIGERIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2018, 21 (01) : 43 - 48