| Literature DB >> 28975075 |
S Praveena Seevaunnamtum1, Kavita Bhojwani2, Nik Abdullah1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Electroacupuncture (EA) is believed to modulate the pain pathway via the release of endogenous opioid substances and stimulation of descending pain inhibitory pathways. In this study, the use of intraoperative 2 Hertz EA stimulation is investigated to determine any opioid-sparing effect and reduction of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients undergoing gynaecological surgery. PATIENT AND METHODS: This was a prospective, double blinded randomized study conducted in a tertiary hospital in Malaysia. Patients (n = 64) were randomly allocated to receive 2 Hertz EA and compared to a control group. EA was started intraoperatively till the end of the surgery (mean duration of surgery was 149.06 ± 42.64 minutes) under general anaesthesia. Postoperative numerical rating scale (NRS), the incidence of nausea, vomiting and usage of rescue antiemetics were recorded at 30 minutes, 2, 4, and 24 hours, respectively. The total morphine demand and usage from the patient-controlled analgesia Morphine (PCAM) were also recorded in the first 24 hours postoperatively.Entities:
Keywords: Electroacupuncture; Gynaecological Surgery; Opioid Usage; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Postoperative Pain
Year: 2016 PMID: 28975075 PMCID: PMC5560591 DOI: 10.5812/aapm.40106
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anesth Pain Med ISSN: 2228-7523
Figure 1.Steps for Location of EA Points
A, step 1: to start to locate pericardium meridian p6 point (Neiguan), B, step 2: to finally locate pericardium meridian p6 point (Neiguan) marked x, C, location of large intestine p4 point (Hegu) marked with black circle.
Figure 2.Flow Chart of patients in Trial
Baseline Characteristics Between Electroacupuncture Group and Control Group
| Variables | EA Group, n = 32, Mean (SD) | Control Group, n = 32, Mean (SD) | Mean Difference (95% CI) | t Statistic (df) | P Value[ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 47.50 (7.94) | 48.72 (6.72) | -1.22 (-4.89,2.47) | -0.66 (62) | 0.510[ |
|
| 60.22 (8.75) | 59.25 (9.71) | 0.97 (-3.65,5.59) | 0.42 (62) | 0.676[ |
|
| 1.57 (0.06) | 1.58 (0.07) | -0.01 (-0.04,0.03) | -0.32 (62) | 0.754[ |
|
| 24.28 (2.97) | 23.71 (3.16) | 0.57 (-0.96,2.10) | 0.75 (62) | 0.458[ |
|
| 149.06 (42.64) | 151.97 (50.71) | 0.805[ |
aIndependent t test.
Figure 3.Mean Numerical Rating Score at Various Time Intervals Between Electroacupuncture and Control Groups
Comparison of Mean Total PCA Morphine Demand and Dose within 24 Hours Between Electroacupuncture and Control Groups
| Variable | EA Group, n = 32, Mean (SD) | Control Group, n = 32, Mean (SD) | Mean Difference, (95% CI) | t Statistic (df) | P Value[ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Demand (times pressed) | 27.28 (21.61) | 55.25 (46. 85) | -27.97 (-46.20,-9,74) | -3.07 (62) | 0.003* |
| Dose, mg | 21.38 (14.38) | 33.94 (20.24) | -12.56 (-21.34,-3.79) | -2.86 (62) | 0.006* |
aIndependent t test.
Figure 4.Incidence of Nausea at Various Time Intervals Between Electroacupuncture and Control Groups