Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet · 2002
Effectiveness of intravenous meperidine for pain relief in the first stage of labour.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Soontrapa Sukree, Somboonporn Woraluk, Komwilaisak Ratana, Sookpanya Sakuntala
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness and side effects of intravenous meperidine in labour pain relief.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: A double blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted in 84 parturients, using normal saline as control. Visual analogue scale, postpartum parturients' opinion of effectiveness, sedative scores, nausea/vomiting, dizziness, delivery method, Apgar scores, and naloxone prescription were assessed.
RESULT: There were no statistically significant differences between the mean and median of visual analogue scale of meperidine and control group. In addition, the sedative scores, nausea/vomiting and dizziness in the meperidine group occurred more than those in the control group significantly. Even mean of the pain increment in the meperidine group was less than those in the control group (p < 0.05). The parturients' opinion on the effectiveness of pain relief during labor within 24 hours of the first postpartum day was only 23.80 per cent in the meperidine group, however, it was statistically significantly different when compared to 7.10 per cent in the control group.
CONCLUSION: Intravenous meperidine exhibited the effectiveness of pain relief of only 23.80 per cent of the subjects, in addition, it may cause many side effects.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: A double blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted in 84 parturients, using normal saline as control. Visual analogue scale, postpartum parturients' opinion of effectiveness, sedative scores, nausea/vomiting, dizziness, delivery method, Apgar scores, and naloxone prescription were assessed.
RESULT: There were no statistically significant differences between the mean and median of visual analogue scale of meperidine and control group. In addition, the sedative scores, nausea/vomiting and dizziness in the meperidine group occurred more than those in the control group significantly. Even mean of the pain increment in the meperidine group was less than those in the control group (p < 0.05). The parturients' opinion on the effectiveness of pain relief during labor within 24 hours of the first postpartum day was only 23.80 per cent in the meperidine group, however, it was statistically significantly different when compared to 7.10 per cent in the control group.
CONCLUSION: Intravenous meperidine exhibited the effectiveness of pain relief of only 23.80 per cent of the subjects, in addition, it may cause many side effects.