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
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
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.


Dettagli sul finanziamento della pubblicazione +
Finanziamento:
Non-Industry funded
Sponsor:
Israeli Defense Force (IDF) Medical Corps Research grant
Conflitti:
None disclosed

Rischio di pregiudizio

4,5/10

Criteri di segnalazione

13/20

Indice di fragilità

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)?

Sì = 1

Incerto = 0,5

Non rilevante = 0

No = 0

La valutazione dei criteri di segnalazione valuta la trasparenza con cui gli autori riportano le caratteristiche metodologiche e sperimentali dello studio all'interno della pubblicazione. La valutazione è suddivisa in cinque categorie che vengono presentate di seguito.

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

L'Indice di Fragilità è uno strumento che aiuta l'interpretazione dei risultati significativi, fornendo una misura della forza di un risultato. L'Indice di Fragilità rappresenta il numero di eventi consecutivi che devono essere aggiunti a un risultato dicotomico per rendere il risultato non più significativo. Un numero piccolo rappresenta un risultato più debole, mentre un numero grande rappresenta un risultato più forte.

Perché questo studio era necessario ora?

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.

Qual era la domanda di ricerca principale?

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?

Caratteristiche dello studio +
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.
Quali erano i risultati importanti?
  • 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.
Che cosa devo ricordare di più?

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.

Come influenzerà l'assistenza ai miei pazienti?

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.

DISCLAIMER

Il contenuto di questa pagina è solo a scopo informativo e non intende sostituire la consulenza, la diagnosi o il trattamento medico professionale. Se ha bisogno di cure mediche, si rivolga sempre al suo medico o al pronto soccorso più vicino. Le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista espressi dalle persone sui contenuti presenti in questa pagina non riflettono le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista di OrthoEvidence.

0 di 4 articoli mensili GRATUITI sbloccati
Ha raggiunto il suo limite di 4 visualizzazioni di articoli gratuiti questo mese

Accesso a OrthoEvidence a soli 1,99 dollari a settimana.

Rimanga in contatto con le ultime prove. Può disdire in qualsiasi momento.
  • Valutazioni critiche dei più recenti studi randomizzati controllati ad alto impatto e delle revisioni sistematiche in ortopedia.
  • Accesso ai contenuti del podcast OrthoEvidence, tra cui collaborazioni con il Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviste con chirurghi di fama internazionale e tavole rotonde su notizie e argomenti ortopedici.
  • Abbonamento a The Pulse, una newsletter bisettimanale basata sulle evidenze scientifiche, progettata per aiutarla a prendere decisioni cliniche migliori.
Upgrade
Close Dialog
Bentornato!
Ha dimenticato la password?
Inizi la sua prova gratuita oggi stesso!

Il suo account sarà affiliato a
e includerà l'accesso gratuito a OrthoEvidence


O
Ha dimenticato la password?

O
Controlli la sua e-mail

Se esiste un account con l'indirizzo e-mail fornito, le verrà inviata un'e-mail di reimpostazione della password. Se non vede l'e-mail, controlli la cartella spam o posta indesiderata.

Per ulteriore assistenza, contatti il nostro team di supporto.

Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Tradurre il Rapporto ACE

OrthoEvidence utilizza un servizio di traduzione di terze parti per rendere i contenuti accessibili in più lingue. Si prega di notare che, sebbene venga fatto ogni sforzo per garantire l'accuratezza, le traduzioni potrebbero non essere sempre perfette.

Come citare questo documento 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

Copiare la citazione
Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Funzionalità per i membri Premium

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence Premium.

Condividi questo articolo ACE Report