Background: Propofol is the most commonly used intravenous inducing agent. Sharp, burning or aching pain on injection is a major problem. The cardiovascular response to the pain can aggravate adverse events in patients with history of coronary artery disease Small boluses of ketamine, magnesium, dexmedetomidine, ondansetron, dexamethasone, lignocaine hydrochloride, ketorolac, metoclopramide and opioids have been tried. To compare analgesic effe Aim: cts of using intravenous ketamine and lignocaine in alleviating pain following propofol injection. A prospective randomized double blinded st Methods And Material: udy was conducted in Chettinad Hospital and Research Institute, Kelambakkam among 50 participants undergoing surgeries under general anesthesia. Tourniquet was applied midarm ,Group L was given 21.3mg of 2% lignocaine and Group K was given 15mg of ketamine. Tourniquet was removed after 30seconds and then 1/3rd dose of total dose of 2mg/kg propofol was given. Degree of injection pain was evaluated using Mccririck Hunter scale. Results: Pain score on propofol injection was similar in both groups. Among the patients, 54% reported no pain,in that 76% patients were in Group L and 52% patients in Group K. McCRIRICK AND HUNTER PAIN SCALE rating between two groups are similar with the p value of more than 0.05. The pre-treatment of 15mg ketamine is as effective as 21.3mg 2% l Conclusions: ignocaine in reducing the severity of propofol injection pain.
Introduction: Chloroprocaine (ester group) is a preservativefree local anaesthetic which is available as isobaric solution. It is being recently popularised in spinal anaesthesia for its shorter duration of action which plays a significant role in the early ambulation and voiding functions, which is the primary essence in ambulatory surgery. Intrathecal Bupivacaine is the most commonly used drug for its block characteristics, taking into account not only the fast initiation of sensory and motor blockade but also faster sensory and motor regression. Aim: To compare the block characteristics between 1% Chloroprocaine and 0.5% Bupivacaine in patients undergoing perianal surgeries under spinal anaesthesia. Materials and Methods: This randomised, interventional double blinded study was carried out in Chettinad Hospital and Research Institute, Kelambakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India, from April 2020 to August 2021. The patients were split into two groups of 34 each. Group-1: Patients received 30 mg of 1% Chloroprocaine intrathecally. Group-2: Patients received 10 mg of 0.5% Bupivacaine intrathecally. In both the groups the onset, duration of both sensory and motor blocks, intraoperative haemodynamic, two segment regression time, time to ambulation and micturition, the time to eligibility for discharge from hospital was evaluated. Independent sample t-test, chi-square test and Fisher’s-Exact test were employed to compare the distribution of qualitative variables between the groups. Results: Total of 68 participants 31 (45.6%) males and 37 (54.4%) females), 34 in each group 1 and group 2 were analysed. Both groups contained maximum patients in >45 years age group, 12 (35.2%) in each group. Demographic and anthropometric parameters of patients in both the groups were comparable. Mean time of ambulation after spinal anaesthesia in the Group-1 was 137.65±9.15 minutes and in Group-2 was 193.38±8.14 minutes (p-value <0.05). Mean time taken to return of voiding function the Group-1 was 157.06±16.05 minutes and in Group-2 was 213.53±10.26 minutes (p-value <0.05). Mean time taken for Post-Anaesthetic Discharge Scoring System (PADSS) score >9 in Group-1 was significantly less (165.29±13.59 minutes) than Group-2 (219.41±9.52 minutes). Mean time duration for request of first rescue analgesic in Group-1 was significantly faster (104.71±8.69 minutes) than Group-2 (157.79±8.81 minutes). There was no significant difference in haemodynamic changes between the study groups. Conclusion: Chloroprocaine has proved to be better than bupivacaine. It has proven to provide adequate surgical anaesthesia, it leads to early regression of motor and sensory blocks, faster un-assisted ambulation and micturition. Time to rescue analgesia was earlier in the Group-1 when compared to Group-2.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.