目的 探讨院前多发伤病人对症镇静镇痛治疗的有效方法.方法 回顾性分析68例多发伤于院前救治中采取的药物对症镇静镇痛措施.结果 采用不同药物后疼痛均有不同程度减轻；给药组疼痛耐受率72.09％,未给药组疼痛耐受率8％,两组差异有显著性.结论 院前有效处理创伤性疼痛,可提高创伤抢救成功率.

Abstract We wanted to evaluate pain relief and endocrine/immune response after local administration of morphine into an abdominal wound. In a randomised double blind design 29 patients undergoing hysterectomy received two blinded injections of morphine and saline. Before surgery the patients in the control group (n = 15) got 10 mg of subcutaneous morphine into an arm and at skin incision 30 ml of saline was infiltrated directly into the wound. The patients in the wound group (n = 14) received 1 ml of saline into an arm before surgery and 10 mg of morphine in 30 ml of saline into the wound at skin incision. Patient controlled analgesia (PCA) with i.v. morphine was used after surgery. Repeated blood samples were obtained from the day before the surgery until 3 days later and analysed for cortisol and interleukin-6 (IL-6). There were no differences between the groups either in pain relief or in the consumption of PCA morphine. The wound group used 47 +/- 15 mg of i.v. morphine and the control group used 50 +/- 16 mg. Peak values for IL-6 and cortisol appeared at 4 h. The area under the curve (AUC) of cortisol at 0-6, 0-10 and 0-20 h was significantly lower in the control group than in the wound group (P < 0.05). High doses of i.v. morphine reduced cortisol and IL-6 levels in the early hours after surgery. The injection of morphine into the wound did not improve pain relief or reduce the consumption of i.v. morphine after surgery. The endocrine stress response to trauma was modified by preoperative administration of morphine.

Abstract The prevalences of complex regional pain syndrome, phantom limb pain, chronic donor-site pain, and persistent pain following total joint arthroplasty are alarmingly high. Central nervous system plasticity that occurs in response to tissue injury may contribute to the development of persistent postoperative pain. Many researchers have focused on methods to prevent central neuroplastic changes from occurring through the utilization of preemptive or preventive multimodal analgesic techniques. Multimodal analgesia allows a reduction in the doses of individual drugs for postoperative pain and thus a lower prevalence of opioid-related adverse events. The rationale for this strategy is the achievement of sufficient analgesia due to the additive effects of, or the synergistic effects between, different analgesics. Effective multimodal analgesic techniques include the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, local anesthetics, alpha-2 agonists, ketamine, alpha(2)-delta ligands, and opioids.

Abstract Despite "clinical lore" among health care providers that treatment with hydromorphone results in improved pain control and fewer adverse side effects, morphine continues to be the first-line medication for postoperative patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). In this study, we compared the efficacy and side-effect profiles of morphine and hydromorphone at concentrations producing equivalent drug effect measured by pain score and miosis. We conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial of 50 general and gynecological surgery patients. Subjects were randomly assigned to receive either morphine (1 mg/mL) or hydromorphone (0.2 mg/mL) via PCA after surgery and were followed for a period of 8 h. The primary outcome was nausea. Secondary outcome variables were pruritus, vomiting, sedation, pain report, pupillary miosis, and patient satisfaction. The side effect profile was not different between drugs. The incidence of nausea did not differ between morphine and hydromorphone-treated patients (1 h: 44% vs 52%, 8 h: 68% vs 64%), vomiting (1 h: 4% vs 0%, 8 h: 0% vs 4%), or pruritus (1 h: 4% vs 16%, 8 h: 40% vs 40%). There was no difference in the amount of medication required to treat side effects or patient satisfaction. The average ratio of morphine to hydromorphone use was about 7:1. The patients used 10.9+/-6.0 mg morphine versus 1.57+/-1.0 mg hydromorphone after 1 h and 29.0+/-18.0 mg morphine versus 3.9+/-2.5 mg hydromorphone after 8 h. There was no difference between the morphine and hydromorphone groups with respect to postoperative pain scores with movement at 1 h (7.9+/-2.3 vs 7.1+/-2.4) or 8 h (5.7+/-2.8 vs 5.9+/-2.7). There was also no difference in pain at rest or miosis between groups. We found no systematic difference between morphine and hydromorphone in opioid-related side effects. Neither was there any difference in efficacy of pain control or patient satisfaction when patients self-titrated to equal drug effect as measured by equianalgesia and pupillary miosis. The choice between morphine and hydromorphone for use in PCA should be guided by patient history, as there may be idiosyncratic reactions to either drug.

ABSTRACT Morphine is one of several opioids used to treat chronic pain. Because of its high abuse potential, urine drug tests can confirm "consistency with prescribed medications." Hydromorphone is a recently described minor metabolite of morphine, but few data exist on the characteristics of this metabolic pathway or the relationship of morphine and hydromorphone between and within subjects. Part I of this retrospective study shows that formation of hydromorphone from morphine is concentration-dependent and possibly saturated at high concentrations of morphine. In addition, the percentage of ultra-rapid metabolizers and poor metabolizers can be determined using the lower asymptote of a sigmoidal mathematical fit and are estimated to be 0.63 and 4.0%, respectively. Expected limits of morphine and hydromorphone (as a result of morphine metabolism) concentrations in the urine were established. Part II of this study used the metabolic ratio (hydromorphone-morphine) to determine the inter-patient and intra-patient variability in morphine metabolism to hydromorphone. Metabolic ratio values varied over a large range; 25-fold and 7-fold, respectively. The expected limits established in this study can assist in assessing the cause for possible variances in metabolism, such as drug interactions. The wide variability between and within subjects may explain unpredictable, adverse effects.

No abstract is available for this article.