ACE Report Cover
Intranasal ketamine an effective alternative to IV morphine for acute analgesia in EDs
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Idioma
Download Download Download
Descargar
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citar
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favoritos
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Idioma
Download Download Download
Descargar
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citar
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favoritos
TRAUMA
Intranasal ketamine an effective alternative to IV morphine for acute analgesia in EDs .
Verified
This report has been verified by one or more authors of the original publication.

OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report

OE Journal. 2017;5(8):14 BMC Emerg Med. 2016 Nov 9;16(1):43

90 patients presenting to the emergency department with moderate to severe pain due to mild or moderate blunt trauma were randomized to be managed with either intranasal (IN) ketamine, intravenous (IV) morphine, or intramuscular (IM) morphine. Patients were assessed for pain every 5 minutes for the first 60 minutes after administration. Results demonstrated significantly earlier onset of clinically relevant pain reduction in the IN ketamine and IV morphine groups compared to the IM morphine group. Adverse events related to confusion, dizziness, and difficulty concentrating were more frequent following IN ketamine administration, while morphine administration was associated with a greater incidence of dry mouth.


Detalles de la financiación de la publicación +
Financiación:
Non-Industry funded
Patrocinador:
Israeli Defense Force (IDF) Medical Corps Research grant
Conflicts:
None disclosed

Riesgo de sesgo

4,5/10

Criterios de información

13/20

Índice de fragilidad

N/A

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)?

Sí = 1

Incierto = 0,5

No relevante = 0

No = 0

La evaluación de los criterios de información evalúa la transparencia con la que los autores informan de las características metodológicas y del ensayo dentro de la publicación. La evaluación se divide en cinco categorías que se presentan a continuación.

1/4

Randomization

2/4

Outcome Measurements

2/4

Inclusion / Exclusion

4/4

Therapy Description

4/4

Statistics

Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65

El Índice de Fragilidad es una herramienta que ayuda en la interpretación de hallazgos significativos, proporcionando una medida de fuerza para un resultado. El Índice de Fragilidad representa el número de eventos consecutivos que es necesario añadir a un resultado dicotómico para que el hallazgo deje de ser significativo. Un número pequeño representa un hallazgo más débil y un número grande un hallazgo más fuerte.

¿Por qué se necesitaba ahora este estudio?

Patients presenting to the orthopaedic emergency department are often in a significant amount of pain. Opiates have traditionally been used as a form of analgesia in these patients. The use of these drugs often requires close monitoring of patients, as hemodynamic or respiratory complications can be quite common. Interest has increased in the possible use of intranasal ketamine in the treatment of these patients, avoiding not only the need for the monitoring associated with opioids, but also avoiding the administration of injections. There is a paucity of evidence evaluating the use of intranasal ketamine in this setting; hence, the need for this study.

¿Cuál era la pregunta principal de la investigación?

In the management of pain for patients presenting to the ED with traumatic limb or spine injuries, what is the efficacy and safety of intranasal ketamine, compared to either intravenous morphine or intramuscular morphine, when assessed over the first 60 minutes after admittance?

Características del estudio +
Population:
90 patients, 18-70 years of age, presenting to the emergency department due to mild or moderate blunt trauma injury and moderate-severe pain (above 80mm on a 100mm scale). Patients with associated head injury, who had taken analgesics within the previous 3h, allergy to either study drug, deviated nasal septum or associated nose injury were excluded.
Intervention:
IN ketamine: Patients were administered 1mg/kg intranasal ketamine using the Intranasal Mucosal Atomization Device (Wolf Tory Medical).
Comparison:
IV morphine: Patients were administered 0.1mg/kg intravenous morphine as a bolus over 30-60 seconds. IM morphine: Patients were administered 0.15mg/kg intramuscular morphine via injection into the gluteal muscle.
Outcomes:
Pain was assessed on a visual analog scale (VAS; 0-100mm). Time to clinically meaningful pain reduction (>15mm from baseline) was recorded. An assessment was also made of overall patient satisfaction, as well as documentation of any adverse events.
Methods:
RCT; Single-center (Trauma level I university hospital)
Time:
Pain was assessed every 5 minutes for the first 60 minutes after intervention.
¿Cuáles fueron los hallazgos importantes?
  • Time to clinically relevant pain reduction was significantly shorter in the IN ketamine group (14.3min [95%CI 9.8-18.8]) and the IV morphine group (8.9min [95%CI 6.6-11.2]) compared to the IM morphine group (26.0min [95%CI 20.3-31.7]) (p=0.003 and 0.000, respectively); there was no significant difference between the IN ketamine group and the IV morphine group (p=0.300).
  • Overall maximum VAS pain reduction within the first 60 minutes did not significantly differ between the IN ketamine group (56mm), IV morphine group (59mm), and the IM morphine group (48mm) (p=0.300).
  • No significant differences in the percentage of patients who did not demonstrate a clinically relevant pain reduction were observed between groups.
  • Adverse event monitoring demonstrated a significantly higher incidence of difficulty concentrating in the IN ketamine group compared to the two morphine groups. The was also a significantly higher incidence of confusion in the IN ketamine group compared to the IV morphine group, and a significantly higher incidence of dizziness in the IN ketamine group compared to the IM morphine group. Adverse events related to dry mouth were significantly more frequent in the morphine groups compared to the IN ketamine group.
  • Overall, no significant difference in the degree of patient satisfaction was observed between the IN ketamine group (58.7mm [95%CI 45.3-72.1]), IV morphine group (70.2mm [95%CI 55.2-85.2]), and IM morphine group (73.9mm [95%CI 62.9-84.9]).
  • No statistically significant differences in vital signs were observed between the three groups.
¿Qué es lo que más debo recordar?

In the management of pain for those presenting to emergency departments with traumatic limb or spine injuries, the use of intranasal ketamine demonstrated similar analgesic efficacy and hemodynamic/respiratory safety over 60 minutes after administration when compared to intravenous morphine. Both intranasal ketamine and intravenous morphine demonstrated significantly more rapid onset of analgesia when compared to intramuscular morphine.

¿Cómo afectará esto al cuidado de mis pacientes?

The results of this study suggest that intranasal administration of ketamine may offer an effective alternative and easier-to-administer method of acute analgesia to intravenous morphine in managing patients in emergency departments with severe pain due to blunt trauma resulting in limb and spine injuries.

DESCARGO DE RESPONSABILIDAD

El contenido de esta página tiene únicamente fines informativos y no pretende sustituir el consejo, diagnóstico o tratamiento médico profesional. Si necesita tratamiento médico, busque siempre el consejo de su médico o acuda al servicio de urgencias más cercano. Las opiniones, creencias y puntos de vista expresados por las personas sobre el contenido que se encuentra en esta página no reflejan las opiniones, creencias y puntos de vista de OrthoEvidence.

0 de 4 artículos mensuales GRATIS desbloqueados
Ha alcanzado su límite de vistas de 4 artículos gratuitos este mes

Acceda a OrtoEvidencia por tan sólo 1,99 $ a la semana.

Manténgase conectado con las últimas pruebas. Cancele en cualquier momento.
  • Valoraciones críticas de los últimos ensayos controlados aleatorizados de gran impacto y revisiones sistemáticas en ortopedia
  • Acceso al contenido del podcast OrthoEvidence, que incluye colaboraciones con el Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, entrevistas con cirujanos reconocidos internacionalmente y mesas redondas sobre noticias y temas ortopédicos
  • Suscripción a The Pulse, un boletín quincenal basado en la evidencia y diseñado para ayudarle a tomar mejores decisiones clínicas
Upgrade
Bienvenido
¿Ha olvidado su contraseña?
Comience hoy mismo su prueba GRATUITA

Su cuenta estará afiliada a
e incluye acceso gratuito a OrthoEvidence


O
¿Olvidó su contraseña?

O
Compruebe su correo electrónico

Si existe una cuenta con la dirección de correo electrónico proporcionada, se le enviará un correo electrónico para restablecer la contraseña. Si no ve el correo electrónico, compruebe su carpeta de correo no deseado o spam.

Si necesita más ayuda póngase en contacto con nuestro equipo de asistencia.

Inicie sesión para activar esta función

Para acceder a esta función, debe iniciar sesión en una cuenta activa de OrthoEvidence. Por favor, inicie sesión o cree una cuenta de prueba GRATUITA.

Traducir Informe ACE

OrthoEvidence utiliza un servicio de traducción de terceros para que el contenido sea accesible en varios idiomas. Tenga en cuenta que, aunque se hace todo lo posible para garantizar la exactitud, las traducciones no siempre son perfectas.

Cómo citar esto ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. Intranasal ketamine an effective alternative to IV morphine for acute analgesia in EDs. OE Journal. 2017;5(8):14. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/intranasal-ketamine-an-effective-alternative-to-iv-morphine-for-acute-analgesia-in-eds

Copiar cita
Inicie sesión para activar esta función

Para acceder a esta función, debe iniciar sesión en una cuenta activa de OrthoEvidence. Por favor, inicie sesión o cree una cuenta de prueba GRATUITA.

Función de miembro Premium

Para acceder a esta función, debe iniciar sesión en una cuenta Premium de OrthoEvidence.

Compartir ACE Report