Midazolam

咪达唑仑
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:药理学方法,特别是镇静剂,在牙科预约期间管理儿童的行为方面越来越受欢迎。
    目的:本研究的目的是比较1m/kg鼻内右美托咪定,0.3mg/kg鼻内咪达唑仑,和一氧化二氮在评估镇静水平时,孩子的行为,开始镇静,生理体征,和不利影响。
    方法:在这项交叉试验中,15名6-8岁儿童随机接受鼻内雾化右美托咪定,鼻内雾化咪达唑仑,和吸入一氧化二氮在三个不同的访问。服用镇静剂后,在每次预约期间进行一次牙髓切除术,并记录结果.每次访问之间的清除期为1周。
    结果:所有三种镇静剂在控制总体行为方面同样有效。右美托咪定的镇静水平评分(激动;评分9)低于其他组。镇静的开始有统计学上的显著差异,右美托咪定的最长起效时间为36.2±9.47分钟。鼻内咪达唑仑给药后主要观察到咳嗽和打喷嚏。在局部麻醉给药和治疗后,鼻内咪达唑仑组的氧饱和度水平在统计学上较低。
    结论:0.3mg/kg的咪达唑仑鼻内镇静与一氧化二氮镇静同样有效,可以控制儿童牙科患者的行为并提供足够的镇静。然而,1m/kg右美托咪定不能提供相同的镇静水平,并且起效时间明显更长。0.3mg/kg鼻内咪达唑仑是焦虑儿童一氧化二氮镇静的有效替代药物。
    BACKGROUND: Pharmacological methods, specifically sedatives, have gained popularity in managing the behavior of children during dental appointments.
    OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare 1 m/kg intranasal dexmedetomidine, 0.3 mg/kg intranasal midazolam, and nitrous oxide in evaluating the level of sedation, behavior of the child, onset of sedation, physiologic signs, and adverse effects.
    METHODS: In this cross-over trial, 15 children aged 6-8 years were randomized to receive intranasal atomized dexmedetomidine, intranasal atomized midazolam, and inhalation nitrous oxide at three separate visits. After administering the sedative agent, a single pulpectomy was performed during each appointment, and the outcomes were recorded. The washout period between each visit was 1 week.
    RESULTS: All three sedative agents were equally effective in controlling overall behavior. Dexmedetomidine showed lower sedation level scores (agitated; score 9) than the other groups. There was a statistically significant difference in the onset of sedation, with dexmedetomidine having the longest onset of 36.2 ± 9.47 min. Coughing and sneezing were predominantly observed after administration of intranasal midazolam. Oxygen saturation levels were statistically lower in the intranasal midazolam group during local anesthesia administration and post-treatment.
    CONCLUSIONS: 0.3 mg/kg intranasal midazolam is as effective as nitrous oxide sedation for controlling behavior and providing adequate sedation in pediatric dental patients. However, 1 m/kg dexmedetomidine did not provide the same level of sedation and had a significantly longer onset. 0.3 mg/kg intranasal midazolam is an effective alternative to nitrous oxide sedation in anxious children.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    将不同药物的组合配制在自动注射器中,用于针对神经毒性战剂的肠胃外给药。在这项工作中,研究了以下三个变量对化学稳定性的影响:(i)药物组合类型(普利肟,阿托品,咪达唑仑和奥比肟,阿托品,和咪达唑仑);(ii)pH(3对4);和(iii)弹性体密封材料的类型(PH701/50C黑对4023/50GRAY)。注射器储存在三个不同的温度:4、25和40°C。在不同的时间点分析样品以研究物理外观,药物在密封弹性体材料上的吸附,和溶液中的药物含量。咪达唑仑在所有测试的实验条件下都不稳定。在两种类型的密封弹性体材料中均观察到药物吸附,并且显著(p<0.01)依赖于药物的亲脂性。最稳定的制剂是pH4的普拉度肟和阿托品与弹性体密封材料4023/50GRAY的组合。
    Combinations of different drugs are formulated in autoinjectors for parenteral administration against neurotoxic war agents. In this work, the effects on the chemical stability of the following three variables were studied: (i) type of drug combination (pralidoxime, atropine, and midazolam versus obidoxime, atropine, and midazolam); (ii) pH (3 versus 4); and (iii) type of elastomeric sealing material (PH 701/50 C BLACK versus 4023/50 GRAY). Syringes were stored at three different temperatures: 4, 25, and 40 °C. Samples were assayed at different time points to study the physical appearance, drug sorption on the sealing elastomeric materials, and drug content in solution. Midazolam was unstable in all tested experimental conditions. Drug adsorption was observed in both types of sealing elastomeric materials and was significantly (p < 0.01) dependent on the lipophilicity of the drug. The most stable formulation was the combination of pralidoxime and atropine at pH 4 with the elastomeric sealing material 4023/50 GRAY.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暴露于全身麻醉药会对大脑发育产生不利影响,但是在重症监护中使用的镇静剂通过相似的药理机制发挥作用的研究很少。使用定量免疫组织化学和神经行为测试以及已建立的小鼠镇静方案,我们检验了这个假设,反复接触咪达唑仑,儿科重症监护中常用的镇静剂,通过对雷帕霉素(mTOR)途径的机制靶标的作用来干扰神经元发育和随后的认知功能。我们发现咪达唑仑镇静组的小鼠表现出慢性,与对照相比,mTOR活性途径标志物的表达显著增加。此外,两种神经行为结果,Y迷宫和恐惧条件表现的缺陷,咪达唑仑镇静作用的神经病理效应,包括破坏的树突树干化和突触发生,通过雷帕霉素治疗得到改善,一种药理学mTOR通路抑制剂。我们得出结论,延长,反复暴露于咪达唑仑镇静作用通过在脑发育过程中mTOR通路信号的病理性增加干扰神经回路的发育,这对脑结构和功能都有持久的影响.
    Exposure to general anesthetics can adversely affect brain development, but there is little study of sedative agents used in intensive care that act via similar pharmacologic mechanisms. Using quantitative immunohistochemistry and neurobehavioral testing and an established protocol for murine sedation, we tested the hypothesis that lengthy, repetitive exposure to midazolam, a commonly used sedative in pediatric intensive care, interferes with neuronal development and subsequent cognitive function via actions on the mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway. We found that mice in the midazolam sedation group exhibited a chronic, significant increase in the expression of mTOR activity pathway markers in comparison to controls. Furthermore, both neurobehavioral outcomes, deficits in Y-maze and fear-conditioning performance, and neuropathologic effects of midazolam sedation exposure, including disrupted dendritic arborization and synaptogenesis, were ameliorated via treatment with rapamycin, a pharmacologic mTOR pathway inhibitor. We conclude that prolonged, repetitive exposure to midazolam sedation interferes with the development of neural circuitry via a pathologic increase in mTOR pathway signaling during brain development that has lasting consequences for both brain structure and function.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:柔性支气管镜检查(FB)期间的镇静应保持足够的呼吸驱动,确保患者的最大舒适度,并保证程序的目标得以实现。然而,FB的最佳镇静方法尚未建立。本研究旨在比较咪达唑仑-芬太尼(MF)与右美托咪定-氯胺酮(DK)的标准推荐组合在FB期间的患者镇静作用。
    方法:将接受FB的患者随机分配到DK组(n=25)和MF组(n=25)。主要结果是临界去饱和事件的发生率(动脉血氧饱和度<80%,鼻供氧2L/min)。次要结果包括镇静深度,血流动力学并发症,不良事件,以及患者和支气管镜医生的满意度。
    结果:两组间严重的去饱和事件发生率相似(DK:12%vs.MF:28%,p=0.289)。DK达到了更深的最大镇静水平(更高的Ramsay-更低的Riker量表;p<0.001),并且与更长的恢复时间相关(p<0.001)。两组的血流动力学和其他并发症发生率相当。两组患者的满意度相似,但支气管镜医师对DK组合的满意度更高(p=0.033)。
    结论:DK在接受FB治疗的患者中表现出良好的安全性,并且比标准MF组合获得了更深刻的镇静作用和更好的支气管镜医师满意度,而没有增加不良事件的发生率。
    BACKGROUND: Sedation during flexible bronchoscopy (FB) should maintain an adequate respiratory drive, ensure maximum comfort for the patient, and warrant that the objectives of the procedure are achieved. Nevertheless, the optimal sedation method for FB has yet to be established. This study aimed to compare the standard recommended combination of midazolam-fentanyl (MF) with that of dexmedetomidine-ketamine (DK) for patient sedation during FB.
    METHODS: Patients subjected to FB were randomly assigned to a DK (n = 25) and an MF group (n = 25). The primary outcome was the rate of critical desaturation events (arterial oxygen saturation < 80% with nasal oxygen supply 2 L/min). Secondary outcomes included sedation depth, hemodynamic complications, adverse events, and patient and bronchoscopist satisfaction.
    RESULTS: The incidence rates of critical desaturation events were similar between the two groups (DK: 12% vs. MF: 28%, p = 0.289). DK achieved deeper maximum sedation levels (higher Ramsay - lower Riker scale; p < 0.001) and was associated with longer recovery times (p < 0.001). Both groups had comparable rates of hemodynamic and other complications. Patient satisfaction was similar between the two groups, but bronchoscopist satisfaction was higher with the DK combination (p = 0.033).
    CONCLUSIONS: DK demonstrated a good safety profile in patients subjected to FB and achieved more profound sedation and better bronchoscopist satisfaction than the standard MF combination without increasing the rate of adverse events.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:右美托咪定和咪达唑仑是儿童常用的镇静剂。我们进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,以比较右美托咪定联合咪达唑仑与其他镇静剂(包括水合氯醛)提供的镇静的安全性和有效性。咪达唑仑和其他镇静剂在小儿镇静中的应用。
    方法:Embase,WebofScience,科克伦图书馆,和PubMed数据库,和Clinicaltrials.gov从开始到2022年6月的对照试验登记册进行了搜索。纳入所有使用右美托咪定-咪达唑仑进行小儿镇静的随机对照试验。文章搜索,数据提取,纳入研究的质量评估由两名研究人员独立进行.镇静成功率被认为是主要结果。次要结果包括镇静起效时间,镇静恢复时间和不良事件的发生。
    结果:共筛选了522项研究,确定了6项随机对照试验;分析了859例患者。右美托咪定联合咪达唑仑的镇静成功率较高,CT检查中恶心呕吐发生率较低,磁共振成像,与其他镇静剂相比,听觉脑干反应试验或纤维支气管镜检查检查(OR=2.92;95%CI:1.39-6.13,P=0.005,I2=51%;OR=0.23,95%CI:0.07-0.68,P=0.008,I2=0%,分别)。两组患者在恢复时间和不良反应发生方面差异无统计学意义(WMD=-0.27,95%CI:-0.93~-0.39,P=0.42;OR0.70;95%CI:0.48~1.02,P=0.06,I2=45%。分别)。然而,对ASAI-II型儿童的亚组分析结果显示,右美托咪定-咪达唑仑组的起效时间比其他镇静剂快(WMD=-3.08;95%CI:-4.66~-1.49,P=0.0001,I2=30%).
    结论:这项荟萃分析表明,与对照组相比,右美托咪定联合咪达唑仑组的镇静成功率更高,在完成检查时恶心呕吐的发生率更低,表明前瞻性门诊临床应用于程序镇静。
    BACKGROUND: Dexmedetomidine and midazolam are commonly used sedatives in children. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the safety and effectiveness of sedation provided by dexmedetomidine combined with midazolam versus other sedatives including chloral hydrate, midazolam and other sedatives in pediatric sedation.
    METHODS: The Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and PubMed databases, and Clinicaltrials.gov register of controlled trials were searched from inception to June 2022. All randomized controlled trials used dexmedetomidine-midazolam in pediatric sedation were enrolled. The articles search, data extraction, and quality assessment of included studies were performed independently by two researchers. The success rate of sedation was considered as the primary outcome. The secondary outcomes included onset time of sedation, recovery time of sedation and occurrence of adverse events.
    RESULTS: A total of 522 studies were screened and 6 RCTs were identified; 859 patients were analyzed. The administration of dexmedetomidine combined with midazolam was associated with a higher sedation success rate and a lower incidence of nausea and vomiting in computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, Auditory Brainstem Response test or fiberoptic bronchoscopy examinations than the other sedatives did (OR = 2.92; 95% CI: 1.39-6.13, P = 0.005, I2 = 51%; OR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.07-0.68, P = 0.008, I2 = 0%, respectively). Two groups did not differ significantly in recovery time and the occurrence of adverse reactions (WMD = - 0.27, 95% CI: - 0.93 to - 0.39, P = 0.42; OR 0.70; 95% CI: 0.48-1.02, P = 0.06, I2 = 45%. respectively). However, the results of the subgroup analysis of ASA I-II children showed a quicker onset time in dexmedetomidine-midazolam group than the other sedatives (WMD=-3.08; 95% CI: -4.66 to - 1.49, P = 0.0001, I2 = 30%).
    CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis showed that compared with the control group, dexmedetomidine combined with midazolam group provided higher sedation success rates and caused a lower incidence of nausea and vomiting in completing examinations, indicating a prospective outpatient clinical application for procedural sedation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: English Abstract
    OBJECTIVE: Was to improve the quality of treatment in pediatric outpatient dentistry with the effective use of oral sedation.
    METHODS: The study comprised 60 children aged 3-12 years who were undergoing therapeutic/surgical dental treatment. All children\'s somatic state was assessed as ASAI-II. All children met a number of psychological, anamnestic and procedural criteria. Midazolam and chloropyramine in a dose calculated for the patient\'s body weight were used as components of oral sedation. The estimated sedation depth was Ramsay II-III. The study included an analysis of objective (the time of comfortable treatment, the amount of treated or removed teeth per visit, the possibility of treatment without anesthesia during further visits) and subjective (the possibility of contact with the child during treatment, behavioral reactions at home and on further visits) criteria. Negative behavioral reactions and dental effects were also assessed.
    RESULTS: The treatment features correlated with the age category and gender of the patient. In the older age group of 7-12 years, the amount of comfortable treatment time was higher, the possibility of contact with the child reached 100% (which is twice as much as in the younger one), and also a larger number of patients were treated during further visits without an anesthetic aid. At the same time, in the younger age group of 3-6 years, the volume of treatment per visit was higher, since it takes less time to treat a primary tooth than for a permanent one. Side effects (visual hallucinations, diplopia, hyperactivity, tearfulness and aggressiveness) were more often recorded in the younger age group, but emotional instability was equally manifested in both groups.
    CONCLUSIONS: In order to maximize the effectiveness of using oral sedation as a method, it is necessary to take into account the duration and traumatism of the proposed procedure, the peculiarities of age psychology and the peculiarities of the psychological development of boys and girls.
    UNASSIGNED: Улучшить качество лечения детей в амбулаторной стоматологии путем эффективного применения пероральной седации.
    UNASSIGNED: В исследование вошли 60 детей в возрасте 3—12 лет, которым предстояло терапевтическое/хирургическое стоматологическое вмешательство. Все дети соответствовали по соматическому состоянию ASA I—II и отвечали ряду психологических, анамнестических и процедуральных критериев. В качестве компонентов пероральной седации использовались препараты мидазолам и хлоропирамин в дозе, рассчитанной на массу тела пациента. Предполагаемая глубина седации — Ramsay II—III. Анализировались объективные критерии: время комфортного лечения, объем лечения за один визит, возможность лечения без анестезиологического пособия при дальнейших визитах; а также субъективные: возможность контакта с ребенком в процессе лечения, поведенческие реакции в домашних условиях и на дальнейших визитах. Также оценивались негативные поведенческие реакции и стоматологические эффекты.
    UNASSIGNED: Особенности лечения коррелировали с возрастной категорией и полом пациента. В старшей возрастной категории 7—12 лет была больше величина комфортного времени лечения, возможность контакта с ребенком достигла 100% (что в два раза больше, чем в младшей), а также большее количество пациентов было пролечено при дальнейших визитах без анестезиологического пособия. При этом в младшей возрастной категории 3—6 лет был больше объем лечения за один визит, так как для лечения одного временного зуба необходимо меньше времени, чем для постоянного. Побочные эффекты (зрительные галлюцинации, диплопия, гиперактивность, плаксивость и агрессивность) чаще регистрировались в младшей возрастной категории, однако эмоциональная нестабильность была равно проявлена в обеих группах.
    UNASSIGNED: Для наибольшей эффективности использования пероральной седации необходимо учитывать длительность и травматичность предполагаемой процедуры, особенности возрастной психологии и особенности психологического развития мальчиков и девочек.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    阴茎折叠术通常在全身麻醉或脊髓麻醉下进行。清醒镇静(CS)可降低麻醉风险,成本效益,以及在门诊环境中以更短的等待时间执行该程序的能力。我们试图比较麻醉师和护理CS(NACS)在深静脉镇静(DIS)下阴茎折叠的耐受性。
    对阴茎折叠的耐受性进行了前瞻性评估,不包括翻修手术和沙漏畸形或铰链畸形。DIS包括咪达唑仑和氯胺酮,同时输注异丙酚和瑞芬太尼。NACS由咪达唑仑和芬太尼组成。基线特征,程序信息,收集患者和外科医生报告的疼痛评估.在随访中对患者进行了标准化的耐受性问卷。
    纳入了具有相似基线特征的40例患者(23DIS;17NACS)。在NACS中,DIS队列的中位曲率为55°(四分位距=43.75-76.25)和45°(四分位距=45-60)。没有手术流产或转换为全身麻醉的成功率为100%。关于后续行动,所有患者均有功能弯曲(<20°),DIS和NACS队列中100%的患者报告他们会向其他人推荐CS.两个队列中超过93%的患者将来会选择CS而不是全身麻醉,围手术期和术后疼痛组间无差异。
    阴茎折叠与CS,无论是由麻醉师还是护理人员管理,耐受性良好,疼痛或并发症无差异。这表明,门诊阴茎折叠与训练有素的护理人员管理CS可以安全地降低成本,风险,和等待时间。
    UNASSIGNED: Penile plication is commonly performed for Peyronie\'s disease under general or spinal anesthesia. Conscious sedation (CS) offers decreased anesthetic risks, cost-effectiveness, and the ability to perform the procedure in outpatient settings with shorter wait times. We sought to compare tolerability of penile plication under deep intravenous sedation (DIS) administered by anesthesiologists and nursing-administered CS (NACS).
    UNASSIGNED: Tolerability for penile plication was prospectively evaluated, excluding revision surgeries and those with hourglass or hinge deformities. DIS included midazolam and ketamine with infusion of propofol and remifentanil. NACS consisted of midazolam and fentanyl. Baseline characteristics, procedural information, and patient- and surgeon-reported pain assessments were collected. Patients were administered a standardized tolerability questionnaire on follow-up.
    UNASSIGNED: Forty patients were enrolled (23 DIS; 17 NACS) with similar baseline characteristics. Median curvature of the DIS cohort was 55° (interquartile range = 43.75-76.25) and 45° (interquartile range = 45-60) in NACS. There was a 100% success rate with no procedure abortion or conversion to general anesthetic. On follow-up, all patients had functional curvature (<20°), and 100% of patients in the DIS and NACS cohorts reported that they would recommend CS to others. Over 93% of patients in both cohorts would choose CS over general anesthetic in the future, with no differences in perioperative and postoperative pain between groups.
    UNASSIGNED: Penile plication with CS, whether administered by an anesthesiologist or nursing, is well tolerated with no differences in pain or complications. This indicates that outpatient penile plication with trained nursing staff administering CS can safely reduce costs, risks, and wait times.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    比较了小儿双向内窥镜检查中基于丙泊酚的镇静和咪达唑仑镇静的有效性和安全性。
    我们回顾性分析了接受双向内窥镜检查的儿科患者(≤15岁)的病例,食管胃十二指肠镜检查,和小儿胃肠病学家的结肠镜检查。人口统计数据,适应症,镇静剂/剂量,临床结果,内镜检查结果,不良事件,比较两个镇静组的患者总时间要求(患者在我院住院的总时间)。
    91名儿童(51名男孩,40个女孩,平均年龄13岁,范围9-15)在我们医院接受治疗。对51例患者(丙泊酚为基础的镇静组)单独使用丙泊酚或与咪达唑仑和/或喷他佐辛联合使用。对其他40例患者(咪达唑仑镇静组)单独使用咪达唑仑或与喷他佐辛联合使用。在异丙酚组中,使用以下平均剂量:异丙酚,96毫克(范围40-145毫克);咪达唑仑,4.9毫克(范围3-5毫克);喷他佐辛,7.5毫克。在咪达唑仑组中,咪达唑仑和喷他佐辛的平均剂量为6.2mg(范围4-10mg)和15mg,分别。所有程序均由小儿胃肠病学家成功完成。两组的总手术时间和内镜检查结果相似,但与咪达唑仑组相比,丙泊酚组的中位患者所需时间明显缩短(7.3hvs.8.4h,p<0.001)。两组均无不良事件发生。
    小儿胃肠病学家安全有效地进行了小儿双向内镜检查中基于丙泊酚的镇静,其患者所需时间短于咪达唑仑镇静。
    UNASSIGNED: The effectiveness and safety of propofol-based sedation and midazolam sedation in pediatric bidirectional endoscopy were compared.
    UNASSIGNED: We retrospectively analyzed the cases of pediatric patients (≤15 years old) who had undergone bidirectional endoscopy, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, and colonoscopy by pediatric gastroenterologists. Demographic data, indications, sedatives/dosages, clinical outcomes, endoscopic findings, adverse events, and total patient time requirements (total time in which patients stay in our hospital) were compared in the two sedation groups.
    UNASSIGNED: Ninety-one children (51 boys, 40 girls, mean age 13 years, range 9-15) treated at our hospital were enrolled. Propofol alone or in combination with midazolam and/or pentazocine was administered to 51 patients (propofol-based sedation group). Midazolam alone or in combination with pentazocine was administered to the other 40 patients (midazolam sedation group). In the propofol group, the following mean doses were used: propofol, 96 mg (range 40-145 mg); midazolam, 4.9 mg (range 3-5 mg); and pentazocine, 7.5 mg. In the midazolam group, the mean doses of midazolam and pentazocine were 6.2 mg (range 4-10 mg) and 15 mg, respectively. All procedures were successfully completed by pediatric gastroenterologists. The total procedure times and endoscopic findings were similar in the two groups, but the median patient time requirement in the propofol group was significantly shorter versus the midazolam group (7.3 h vs. 8.4 h, p < 0.001). No adverse events occurred in either group.
    UNASSIGNED: Propofol-based sedation in pediatric bidirectional endoscopy was safely and effectively performed by pediatric gastroenterologists, and its patient time requirement was shorter than that for midazolam sedation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    标准剂量的镇痛和镇静药物给予重症监护患者。需要更好地检查所得的血液浓度范围和相应的临床反应。这项研究的目的是描述每日剂量,测量的血液浓度,和危重患者的临床反应。目的还在于有助于建立所研究药物的全血浓度参考值。
    对一所大学医院的302名普通重症监护病房(ICU)入院的前瞻性数据进行的描述性研究。十种药物(可乐定,芬太尼,吗啡,右美托咪定,氯胺酮,酮吡米酮,咪达唑仑,扑热息痛,异丙酚,和硫喷妥钠)进行了调查,并记录每日剂量。每天采集两次血样,并测量药物浓度。使用里士满激动镇静量表(RASS)和数字评定量表(NRS)记录临床反应。
    药物剂量在推荐剂量范围内。所有10种药物的血液浓度在队列中显示出很大的差异,但只有3%高于可乐定(122中的57例)和咪达唑仑(122中的38例)占主导地位的治疗间隔。RASS和NRS与药物浓度无关。
    在ICU环境中使用镇痛和镇静药物的推荐剂量间隔,并定期监测临床反应,如RASS和NRS,导致97%的浓度低于治疗间隔的上限。这项研究有助于这10种药物的全血药物浓度参考值。
    UNASSIGNED: Standard dosages of analgesic and sedative drugs are given to intensive care patients. The resulting range of blood concentrations and corresponding clinical responses need to be better examined. The purpose of this study was to describe daily dosages, measured blood concentrations, and clinical responses in critically ill patients. The purpose was also to contribute to establishing whole blood concentration reference values of the drugs investigated.
    UNASSIGNED: A descriptive study of prospectively collected data from 302 admissions to a general intensive care unit (ICU) at a university hospital. Ten drugs (clonidine, fentanyl, morphine, dexmedetomidine, ketamine, ketobemidone, midazolam, paracetamol, propofol, and thiopental) were investigated, and daily dosages recorded. Blood samples were collected twice daily, and drug concentrations were measured. Clinical responses were registered using Richmond agitation-sedation scale (RASS) and Numeric rating scale (NRS).
    UNASSIGNED: Drug dosages were within recommended dose ranges. Blood concentrations for all 10 drugs showed a wide variation within the cohort, but only 3% were above therapeutic interval where clonidine (57 of 122) and midazolam (38 of 122) dominated. RASS and NRS were not correlated to drug concentrations.
    UNASSIGNED: Using recommended dose intervals for analgesic and sedative drugs in the ICU setting combined with regular monitoring of clinical responses such as RASS and NRS leads to 97% of concentrations being below the upper limit in the therapeutic interval. This study contributes to whole blood drug concentration reference values regarding these 10 drugs.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:在这项研究中,我们比较了氯胺酮和咪达唑仑联合吗啡对重症监护病房(ICU)出院后机械通气患者抑郁和焦虑严重程度的影响.
    方法:这项随机单盲临床试验包括50例患者,这些患者是在Gorgan市5Azar教学医院ICU进行开颅手术和术后机械通气的候选人,伊朗北部,从2021年到2022年。通过四重区组随机化将患者分为两组。在A组中,开颅手术后15分钟内输注0.5mg/kg氯胺酮,然后在机械通气期间以5µ/kg/min的剂量继续输注。B组,咪达唑仑的输注剂量为2-3mg/hr,吗啡的输注剂量为3-5mg/hr。患者从ICU出院后,如果他们的格拉斯哥昏迷量表得分≥14,贝克的焦虑和抑郁量表在2周内由心理学家完成,2个月,出院后6个月。
    结果:氯胺酮组出院后2个月(P=0.01)和6个月(P=0.03)的平均抑郁评分明显低于咪达唑仑和吗啡组。出院后2周(P=0.006)和6个月(P=0.002)氯胺酮组的平均焦虑评分显著降低。
    结论:氯胺酮是长期预防和治疗ICU出院患者焦虑和抑郁的有效药物。然而,需要进一步的更大量的研究来验证这些结果.
    BACKGROUND: In this study, we compare the effects of ketamine and the combination of midazolam and morphine on the severity of depression and anxiety in mechanically ventilated patients after discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU).
    METHODS: This randomized single-blind clinical trial included 50 patients who were candidates for craniotomy and postoperative mechanical ventilation in the ICU of 5 Azar Teaching Hospital in Gorgan City, North Iran, from 2021 to 2022. Patients were allocated to two groups by quadruple block randomization. In group A, 0.5 mg/kg of ketamine was infused over 15 minutes after craniotomy and then continued at a dose of 5 µ/kg/min during mechanical ventilation. In group B, midazolam was infused at a dose of 2-3 mg/hr and morphine at a dose of 3-5 mg/hr. After patients were discharged from the ICU, if their Glasgow Coma Scale scores were ≥14, Beck\'s anxiety and depression inventories were completed by a psychologist within 2 weeks, 2 months, and 6 months after discharge.
    RESULTS: The mean scores of depression at 2 months (P=0.01) and 6 months (P=0.03) after discharge were significantly lower in the ketamine group than in the midazolam and morphine group. The mean anxiety scores were significantly lower in the ketamine group 2 weeks (P=0.006) and 6 months (P=0.002) after discharge.
    CONCLUSIONS: Ketamine is an effective drug for preventing and treating anxiety and depression over the long term in patients discharged from the ICU. However, further larger volume studies are required to validate these results.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号