优化外科急腹症早期不同止痛方案临床疗效  

Optimizing different analgesic methods on treating surgical acute abdominal pain

作　　者：邢帮荣[1] 叶志强[1] 邓宇[1] 陈郁鲜[1] 孔庆磊[1] 

机构地区：[1]中山大学附属第三医院,广州510630

出　　处：《广州医药》2008年第5期8-10,共3页Guangzhou Medical Journal

摘　　要：目的比较不同止痛方案对外科急腹症早期止痛的临床疗效。方法358例外科急腹症患者随机分为Ⅰ组:诺仕帕组(120例)、Ⅱ组:诺仕帕+曲马多组(122例)和对照组(Ⅲ组):山莨菪碱(654-2)组(116例)。采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)对给药0h、0.5h、1h、2h后止痛疗效进行评估,观察解痉止痛效果及其不良反应。结果不同时段Ⅰ组、Ⅱ组分别与Ⅲ组的疼痛缓解程度比较,差异具有显著性(P<0.05);Ⅰ组与Ⅱ组比较,有显著性差异(P<0.05)。结论诺仕帕治疗外科急腹症具有独特的疗效而又无抗胆碱能作用,不影响诊断,与曲马多合用,可明显加强止痛效果,系首选用药方案。Objective To compare the analgesia effects and side effects.of different analgesic methods on treating surgical acute abdominal pain. Methods 358 patients suffered from surgical acute abdominal pain were randomly divided into 3 groups： group Ⅰ （ 120 cases） received Nospa with 80 mg/t × 1 -2 t/d; group Ⅱ （ 116 cases） received Nospa with 80 mg/t × 1 -2 t/d and tramadol with 100 mg/t × 1 -2 t/d; group Ⅲ （ 116 cases） received anisodamine （654-2） with 10 mg/t × 1 -2 t/ d. Pain was assessed by patients with using visual analog scales （VAS） at 0 hour, 0. 5 hour, 1 hour and 2 hours after using painkiller and rate of side-effect event was also evaluated. Results Group Ⅰ and group Ⅱ had greater analgesic efficacy than group Ⅲ in patients （P 〈 0. 05 ）, and caused fewer side-effect events than group Ⅲ （ P 〈 0.05 ） ; Group Ⅱ had greater analgesic efficacy than group Ⅰ in patients （P 〈 0. 05） . Conclusion Nospa has more significant analgesic efficacy and fewer side-effect events than anisodamine to treat surgical acute abdominal pain. It suggests that Nospa plus tramadol provides a new effective analgesic method.

关 键 词：诺仕帕 曲马多 急腹症 

分 类 号：R656.1[医药卫生—急诊医学] R473.73[医药卫生—外科学]