Improved outcomes with infiltration and intraarticular injection following THA .
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2013;1(11):23 Acta Orthop. 2007 Apr;78(2):180-680 patients with osteoarthritis undergoing total hip replacement surgery were randomized to receive a combination of infiltration with either a single intraarticular injection, or epidural infusion, to compare pain relief in individuals post-surgery. The findings indicated that infiltration with one intraarticular injection resulted in multiple benefits, including improved pain relief, reduced narcotic consumption, decreased occurrence of side effects, improved walking ability, as well as decreased time of hospital stay.
Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?
Was allocation adequately concealed?
Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?
Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?
Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?
Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?
Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?
Oui = 1
Incertain = 0,5
Non pertinent = 0
Non = 0
L'évaluation des critères de rapport permet d'évaluer la transparence avec laquelle les auteurs rapportent les caractéristiques méthodologiques et les caractéristiques de l'essai dans la publication. L'évaluation est divisée en cinq catégories qui sont présentées ci-dessous.
2/4
Aleatorización
2/4
Medición de resultados
4/4
Inclusión / exclusión
4/4
Descripción de la terapia
4/4
Estadísticas
Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65
L'indice de fragilité est un outil qui aide à l'interprétation des résultats significatifs, en fournissant une mesure de la force d'un résultat. L'indice de fragilité représente le nombre d'événements consécutifs qui doivent être ajoutés à un résultat dichotomique pour que le résultat ne soit plus significatif. Un petit nombre représente un résultat plus faible et un grand nombre un résultat plus fort.
Pourquoi cette étude était-elle nécessaire maintenant ?
Following total hip replacements, post-operative relief can be provided through a variety of methods, some of which include intravenous analgesia, epidural analgesia, and peripheral nerve block techniques. With the goal of reducing the occurrence of side effects while still maintaining sufficient pain relief, the combination of local infiltration and single-shot injections has been introduced. Infiltration combined with a single-shot intraarticular injection in the hip joint has not been compared with epidural infusion. Therefore, this study was needed to investigate the effects of this combined technique on analgesia in patients undergoing a total hip replacement.
Quelle était la principale question de recherche ?
Does the use of infiltration combined with a single-shot intraarticular injection result in increased analgesia and improved overall patient outcome postoperatively, as compared to epidural infusion, in patients undergoing a total hip replacement?
- Pain scores measured by VAS from 2 to 20 hours postoperative were similar between the two groups (p=0.2). However, pain scores in group A were significantly lower compared to group E in the 24-28 hour period (8 [IQR 12-33.5] vs. 20 [3.5-39]; p=0.02) and the 52-96 hour period (0 [IQR 0-0] vs. 11 [5.5-24]; p<0.001).
- During the first 20 hours patients in group A had reduced narcotic consumption compared to group E (17.4 mg [IQR 0-40.5] vs. 26 mg [IQR 21-52]; p=0.004). Total consumption over the 96 hour period was also significantly lower in group A vs group E (258 [IQR 167–366] vs. 324 [IQR 221–543]; p=0.05).
- Eight hours after surgery, walking ability was improved in group A in comparison to group E (33/38 vs. 13/37; p<0.001). Bromage scores also favoured group A over group E (p<0.001).
- Group A had a reduced length of hospital stay compared to Group E; 4.5 (IQR 3-6) and 7 (IQR 5.5-7), respectively (p<0.001).
- With the exception of nausea (p=0.1), group A had lower recurrence of vomiting (p=0.05), urinary retention (p=0.001), itch (p=0.01), and constipation (p<0.001). Additionally, 1 patient in each group developed deep vein thrombosis.
De quoi dois-je me souvenir en priorité ?
Patients who received the combination of wound infiltration and one intraarticular injection following total hip replacement, had reduced narcotic consumption, decreased occurrence of side effects, shorter length of stay in hospital, as well as improved walking ability, when compared to continuous epidural infusion.
Comment cela affectera-t-il les soins prodigués à mes patients ?
The results of this study indicated that the combination of wound infiltration with a single intraarticular injection provides numerous benefits to patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. It is important to note that no conclusions were made regarding the risk for deep infection with this technique. Additional studies are needed to confirm these results.
AVIS DE NON-RESPONSABILITÉ
Le contenu de cette page est fourni à titre d'information uniquement et n'est pas destiné à remplacer un avis médical, un diagnostic ou un traitement professionnel. Si vous avez besoin d'un traitement médical, demandez toujours l'avis de votre médecin ou rendez-vous au service des urgences le plus proche. Les opinions, croyances et points de vue exprimés par les individus sur le contenu de cette page ne reflètent pas les opinions, croyances et points de vue d'OrthoEvidence.
0 de 4 articles mensuels GRATUITS débloqués
