Effect of varying intravenous patient-controlled analgesia dose and lockout interval while maintaining a constant hourly maximum dose

被引:18
作者
Badner, NH
Doyle, JA
Smith, MH
Herrick, IA
机构
[1] Department of Anaesthesia, University Campus, London Health Sciences Center, London, Ont.
[2] Department of Anaesthesia, University Campus, London Health Sciences Center, London, Ont. N6A 5A5
关键词
analgesia; postoperative; demand; equipment; patient-controlled analgesia;
D O I
10.1016/0952-8180(96)00077-3
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Study Objective: To investigate the effect on the use of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) of varying the dose (D) and lockout interval (LI) while keeping the hourly maximum dose constant. Design: Randomized, prospective study. Setting: Teaching hospital. Patients: 75 patients scheduled to receive PCA morphine following abdominal surgery. Interventions: Postoperatively, patients were randomly assigned to receive PCA morphine with the following parameters: D = 1 mg, LI = 6 min (Group 1-6), D = 1.5 mg, LI = 9 min (Group 1.5-9), or D = 2 mg, LI = 12 min (Group 2-12), so that each group could receive a maximum hourly dose or 10 mg. Inadequate analgesia was managed by increasing the dose and lockout interval, while excessive sedation or respiratory rate less than 10 breaths/min resulted in decreasing the dose and lockout interval. Measurements and Main Results: Patients were assessed for pain [visual analog scale (VAS), verbal rating scale (VRS)] and side effects at 1, 2, 4, and 24 hours. The number of doses administered, missed attempts, and morphine used for the first 24 hours wets recorded by automatic printout from the PCA machine. There was no difference in the total 24-hour morphine consumption, analgesia, or incidence of side effects among the three groups at any of the measurement limes. Two patients, one each in the 1.5-9 and 2-12 groups, required naloxone for respiratory depression. The number of PCA injections, attempts, missed attemps, and the incidence of dosage adjustment were all significantly higher for the 1-6 group (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The use of 1.0 mg with a 6-minute lockout may represent appropriate dose titration because this group obtained equivalent analgesia, morphine use, and side effects as the two larger dose and lockout groups. However, the increased number of PCA attempts and missed attempts may reflect lower satisfaction with PCA therapy.
引用
收藏
页码:382 / 385
页数:4
相关论文
共 11 条
[1]  
BENNETT RL, 1986, SEMIN ANESTH, V5, P112
[2]  
DAHL JB, 1992, ANESTH ANALG, V74, P362
[3]   RESPIRATORY DEPRESSION ASSOCIATED WITH PATIENT-CONTROLLED ANALGESIA - A REVIEW OF 8 CASES [J].
ETCHES, RC .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA-JOURNAL CANADIEN D ANESTHESIE, 1994, 41 (02) :125-132
[4]  
JAFFE JH, 1990, PHARMACOL BASIS THER, P485
[5]   PATIENT-CONTROLLED ANALGESIA WITH AND WITHOUT BACKGROUND INFUSION - ANALGESIA ASSESSED USING THE DEMAND - DELIVERY RATIO [J].
MCCOY, EP ;
FURNESS, G ;
WRIGHT, PMC .
ANAESTHESIA, 1993, 48 (03) :256-265
[6]   VARIABLES OF PATIENT-CONTROLLED ANALGESIA .2. CONCURRENT INFUSION [J].
OWEN, H ;
SZEKELY, SM ;
PLUMMER, JL ;
CUSHNIE, JM ;
MATHER, LE .
ANAESTHESIA, 1989, 44 (01) :11-13
[7]   VARIABLES OF PATIENT-CONTROLLED ANALGESIA .1. BOLUS SIZE [J].
OWEN, H ;
PLUMMER, JL ;
ARMSTRONG, I ;
MATHER, LE ;
COUSINS, MJ .
ANAESTHESIA, 1989, 44 (01) :7-10
[8]   EFFECTS OF A NIGHTTIME OPIOID INFUSION WITH PCA THERAPY ON PATIENT COMFORT AND ANALGESIC REQUIREMENTS AFTER ABDOMINAL HYSTERECTOMY [J].
PARKER, RK ;
HOLTMANN, B ;
WHITE, PF .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1992, 76 (03) :362-367
[9]   PATIENT-CONTROLLED ANALGESIA - DOES A CONCURRENT OPIOID INFUSION IMPROVE PAIN MANAGEMENT AFTER SURGERY [J].
PARKER, RK ;
HOLTMANN, B ;
WHITE, PF .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1991, 266 (14) :1947-1952
[10]   AN EVALUATION OF MORPHINE AND OXYMORPHONE ADMINISTERED VIA PATIENT-CONTROLLED ANALGESIA (PCA) OR PCA PLUS BASAL INFUSION IN POSTCESAREAN-DELIVERY PATIENTS [J].
SINATRA, R ;
CHUNG, KS ;
SILVERMAN, DG ;
BRULL, SJ ;
CHUNG, J ;
HARRISON, DM ;
DONIELSON, D ;
WEINSTOCK, A .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1989, 71 (04) :502-507