Intranasal Sufentanil Versus Intravenous Morphine for Acute Pain in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Pilot Trial.

BACKGROUND

Patients in the United States frequently seek medical attention in the emergency department (ED) to address their pain. The intranasal (i.n.) route provides a safe, effective, and painless alternative method of drug administration. Sufentanil is an inexpensive synthetic opioid with a high therapeutic index and rapid onset of action, making it an attractive agent for management of acute pain in the ED.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of i.n. sufentanil as the primary analgesic for acute pain in the ED.

METHODS

This was a single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, controlled trial that evaluated the use of i.n. sufentanil 0.7 μg/kg via mucosal atomizer device vs. intravenous morphine 0.1 mg/kg in adult patients who presented to the ED with acute pain. The primary outcome was patient's pain score at 10 min after administration of intervention. Secondary outcomes were adverse events, the need for rescue analgesia, and patient satisfaction after treatment.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were enrolled in each group. There was no significant difference in pain scores at 10 min after administration of intervention (sufentanil: 2.0, interquartile range = 2.0-3.3 vs. morphine: 3.0, interquartile range = 2.0-5.3, p = 0.198). No serious adverse events were reported. Rescue analgesia was not requested in either group. No significant difference in median satisfaction scores was found.

CONCLUSION

The use of i.n. sufentanil at 0.7 μg/kg/dose resulted in rapid and safe analgesia with comparable efficacy to i.v. morphine for up to 30 min in patients who presented with acute pain in the ED.