Dergiler / Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences / 2017 / Cilt: 47 - Sayı: 4

Prevention of propofol injection-related pain using pretreatment transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation

Sayfa
1267–1276
Yayın Tarihi
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Conclusions: Pretreatment TEAS effectively reduces the incidence and severity of propofol injection-related pain, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, and patient postoperative pain scores.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Background/aim: This study aimed to study the effect of pretreatment transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) in preventing propofol injection-related pain.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Materials and methods: A total of 360 patients who were to undergo elective hysteroscopy surgery were randomly divided into the following three groups of 120 patients each: control (Group C), sham TEAS (Group F), and TEAS (Group T).
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusions: Pretreatment TEAS effectively reduces the incidence and severity of propofol injection-related pain, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, and patient postoperative pain scores.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Background/aim: This study aimed to study the effect of pretreatment transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) in preventing propofol injection-related pain. Materials and methods: A total of 360 patients who were to undergo elective hysteroscopy surgery were randomly divided into the following three groups of 120 patients each: control (Group C), sham TEAS (Group F), and TEAS (Group T). Patients in Group C did not undergo any treatment before surgery; 30 min before the induction of anesthesia, patients in Groups F and T underwent electrical stimulation of the bilateral LI4-PC6 acupoint. Patients in Group F were subjected to feeling flow , while those in Group T were subjected to tolerance flow. The stimulation frequency was 2/100 Hz and the duration of stimulation was 30 min. After the induction of anesthesia, propofol injection-related pain scores, hemodynamic parameters, and adverse reactions were recorded. Results: Of the 360 patients, 324 completed the study. There were significant differences among the groups in terms of the incidence of moderate-to-severe pain. In terms of the four-point scaling method, the end of the radial vein, the cubital vein, and the back of the hand vein differed significantly among the three groups (P = 0.05). Finally, using a numerical rating scale, a significant difference was observed among the three groups in terms of the pain scores in the different veins. Conclusions: Pretreatment TEAS effectively reduces the incidence and severity of propofol injection-related pain, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, and patient postoperative pain scores.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

MO, Y., JIN, S., HUANG, L., PAN, Y., CHEN, S., ZHANG, M., ZHUANG, X., WANG, J., DAI, Q. (2022). Prevention of propofol injection-related pain using pretreatment transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, Cilt: 47 - Sayı: 4, 1267–1276. https://ajindex.com/articles/610571

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (15)

  1. Macario A, Weinger M, Truong P, Lee M. Which clinical anesthesia outcomes are both common and important to avoid? The perspective of a panel of expert anesthesiologists. Anesth Analg 1999; 88: 1085-1091
  2. Picard P, Tramèr MR. Prevention of pain on injection with propofol: a quantitative systematic review. Anesth Analg 2000; 90: 963-969
  3. Nathanson MH, Gajraj NM, Russell JA. Prevention of pain on injection of propofol: a comparison of lidocaine with alfentanil. Anesth Analg 1996; 82: 469-471
  4. Jalota L, Kalira V, George E, Apfel CC. Prevention of pain on injection of propofol: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2011; 342: d1110
  5. Yuan CS, Attele AS, Dey L, Lynch JP, Guan X. Transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation potentiates analgesic effect of morphine. Analgesia 2002; 42: 899-903
  6. Tsay SL, Cho YC, Chen ML. Acupressure and transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation in improving fatigue, sleep quality and depression in hemodialysis patients. Am J Chinese Med 2004; 32: 407-416
  7. Allford MA, Mensah JA. Discomfort on injection: a comparison between two formulations of propofol. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2006; 23: 971-974
  8. Kang HJ, Kwon MY, Choi BM, Koo MS, Jang EJ, Lee MA. Clinical factors affecting the pain on injection of propofol. Korean J Anesthesiol 2010; 58: 239-243
  9. Huang CL, Wang YP, Cheng YJ, Susetio L, Liu CC. The effect of carrier intravenous fluid speed on the injection pain of propofol. Anesth Analg 1995; 81: 1087-1088
  10. Stokes DN, Robson N, Hutton P. Effect of diluting propofol on the incidence of pain on injection and venous sequelae. Br J Anaesth 1989; 62: 202-203
  11. Dewandre J, Van BR, Van HJ, Van AH. A comparison of the 2% and 1% formulations of propofol during anaesthesia for craniotomy. Anaesthesia 1994; 49: 8-12
  12. Davies AF, Vadodaria B, Hopwood B, Dexter T, Conn D. Efficacy of microfiltration in decreasing propofol-induced pain. Anesthesia 2002; 57: 557-561
  13. Ozturk E, Izdes S, Babacan A, Kaya K. Temperature of propofol does not reduce the incidence of injection pain. Anaesthesiology 1998; 89: 1041
  14. McCluskey A, Currer BA, Sayeed I. The efficacy of 5% lidocaineprilocaine (EMLA) cream on pain during intravenous injection of propofol. Anesth Analg 2003; 97: 713-714
  15. Kim K, Sung Kim Y, Lee DK, Lim BG, Kim HZ, Kong MH, Kim NS, Lee IO. Reducing the pain of microemulsion propofol injections: a double-blind, randomized study of three methods of tourniquet and lidocaine. Clin Ther 2013; 35: 1734-