Q Huang1, H Xu, Q-S Xiao. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Shanxian Central Hospital, Shanxian, Shandong, China. x1854q@163.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of two different analgesia methods on postoperative pain of patients with moderate and severe craniocerebral injury who had an emergency operation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this study, 64 patients who were treated in our hospital from January 2015 to January 2016 and diagnosed with acute craniocerebral injury, were consecutively selected. The patients were divided into the propofol total intravenous anesthesia group (the observation group) and the isoflurane intravenous-inhalation combined anesthesia group (the control group) randomly with 32 cases each. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), partial pressure of oxygen (SpO2), and heart rate (HR) were compared and analyzed before and after anesthesia. At the first, second, and third day after the operation, adopt visual analogue scale (VAS), and sedation-agitation scale (GCS) were used to evaluate sedative and analgesic effects of patients. RESULTS: After anesthesia had succeeded, HR, SpO2, and MAP of patients in these two groups decreased, but the decrease in the observation group was less than that in the control group. The differences had statistical differences (p<0.05). At the first, second, and third day after the operation, scores of VAS and GCS in the observation group were obviously lower than those in the control group, and the differences had statistical differences (p<0.05). The total effective rate of anesthesia in the observation group was higher than that in the control group, and the differences had statistical differences (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with moderate and severe craniocerebral injury who had an emergency operation, propofol total intravenous anesthesia is more stable and has a better postoperative pain comparing with isoflurane intravenous-inhalation combined anesthesia.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of two different analgesia methods on postoperative pain of patients with moderate and severe craniocerebral injury who had an emergency operation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this study, 64 patients who were treated in our hospital from January 2015 to January 2016 and diagnosed with acute craniocerebral injury, were consecutively selected. The patients were divided into the propofol total intravenous anesthesia group (the observation group) and the isoflurane intravenous-inhalation combined anesthesia group (the control group) randomly with 32 cases each. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), partial pressure of oxygen (SpO2), and heart rate (HR) were compared and analyzed before and after anesthesia. At the first, second, and third day after the operation, adopt visual analogue scale (VAS), and sedation-agitation scale (GCS) were used to evaluate sedative and analgesic effects of patients. RESULTS: After anesthesia had succeeded, HR, SpO2, and MAP of patients in these two groups decreased, but the decrease in the observation group was less than that in the control group. The differences had statistical differences (p<0.05). At the first, second, and third day after the operation, scores of VAS and GCS in the observation group were obviously lower than those in the control group, and the differences had statistical differences (p<0.05). The total effective rate of anesthesia in the observation group was higher than that in the control group, and the differences had statistical differences (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with moderate and severe craniocerebral injury who had an emergency operation, propofol total intravenous anesthesia is more stable and has a better postoperative pain comparing with isoflurane intravenous-inhalation combined anesthesia.