Satisfactory analgesia with minimal emesis in day surgeries: a randomised controlled trial of morphine versus hydromorphone
Opioids remain the mainstay therapy for post-surgical pain. Although both morphine and hydromorphone are potent analgesics, it has been suggested that hydromorphone is clinically better. Our primary objective was to compare morphine with hydromorphone for achieving satisfactory analgesia with minima...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA 2019-06, Vol.122 (6), p.e107-e113 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | e113 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | e107 |
container_title | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA |
container_volume | 122 |
creator | Shanthanna, H. Paul, J. Lovrics, P. Vanniyasingam, T. Devereaux, P.J. Bhandari, M. Thabane, L. |
description | Opioids remain the mainstay therapy for post-surgical pain. Although both morphine and hydromorphone are potent analgesics, it has been suggested that hydromorphone is clinically better. Our primary objective was to compare morphine with hydromorphone for achieving satisfactory analgesia with minimal emesis (SAME).
We performed a multicentre RCT in 402 patients having ambulatory surgery. A random computer-generated allocation, stratified by site, was developed by our pharmacy. Concealment was achieved by allocating patients to study groups by nurses using sequentially coded study medication syringes having equi-analgesic doses, made available in the postoperative recovery room. Patients, health providers, and research personnel were blinded. The operating-room protocol allowed for routine anaesthetic management, excluding the use of study medications. Study medications were administered by recovery nurses as per an algorithm. Analyses utilised the intention-to-treat principle, and regression analyses were used for outcomes as appropriate and using multiple imputation.
Of 751 patients, 402 were randomised between morphine (n=199) and hydromorphone (n=203). Baseline and intraoperative variables were comparable across the groups. The odds of achieving SAME were similar between the groups (odds ratio: 1.01; 95% confidence interval: 0.57–1.80). There were no differences in the side-effects of severe itching, respiratory depression, or sedation. Patient satisfaction, discharge times, and post-discharge outcomes, including pain and nausea/vomiting over 24 h, were also comparable.
There was no difference between morphine and hydromorphone regarding analgesia and common side-effects. The appearance of dose-limiting side-effects is idiosyncratic; the clinical decision must be based on individual responses.
NCT02223377. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.bja.2019.03.036 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2216283636</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0007091219302417</els_id><sourcerecordid>2216283636</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c396t-9a01c49eb0df79fe583410fe46319df6f14ac8dc147cca54db213f0e745a34153</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE9vEzEQxS1ERUPgA3BBPnLZMLPePzGcUEUBqVIPbc-WY48bR7t2sHdbRXz5Ok3hiGaksUbvPXl-jH1AWCFg93m32uz0qgaUKxClu1dsgU2PVdf3-JotAKCvQGJ9zt7mvAPAvpbtG3YuEOpeYrtgf2705LPTZorpwHXQwz1lr_mjn7Z89MGPeuA0ll3mPnCrDzzP6Z6Sp_yFa550sHH0mSw3MUwpDkN5TskXW3R8jGm_9YH4A6U8Z7492BSflzHQO3bm9JDp_ctcsrvL77cXP6ur6x-_Lr5dVUbIbqqkBjSNpA1Y10tH7Vo0CI6aTqC0rnPYaLO2plxujG4bu6lROKC-aXVRtmLJPp1y9yn-nilPqnzY0DDoQHHOqq6xq9eiK7VkeJKaFHNO5NQ-FQTpoBDUkbnaqcJcHZkrEKWPno8v8fNmJPvP8RdyEXw9Cagc-eApqWw8BUPWJzKTstH_J_4JlleUpA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2216283636</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Satisfactory analgesia with minimal emesis in day surgeries: a randomised controlled trial of morphine versus hydromorphone</title><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Shanthanna, H. ; Paul, J. ; Lovrics, P. ; Vanniyasingam, T. ; Devereaux, P.J. ; Bhandari, M. ; Thabane, L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Shanthanna, H. ; Paul, J. ; Lovrics, P. ; Vanniyasingam, T. ; Devereaux, P.J. ; Bhandari, M. ; Thabane, L.</creatorcontrib><description>Opioids remain the mainstay therapy for post-surgical pain. Although both morphine and hydromorphone are potent analgesics, it has been suggested that hydromorphone is clinically better. Our primary objective was to compare morphine with hydromorphone for achieving satisfactory analgesia with minimal emesis (SAME).
We performed a multicentre RCT in 402 patients having ambulatory surgery. A random computer-generated allocation, stratified by site, was developed by our pharmacy. Concealment was achieved by allocating patients to study groups by nurses using sequentially coded study medication syringes having equi-analgesic doses, made available in the postoperative recovery room. Patients, health providers, and research personnel were blinded. The operating-room protocol allowed for routine anaesthetic management, excluding the use of study medications. Study medications were administered by recovery nurses as per an algorithm. Analyses utilised the intention-to-treat principle, and regression analyses were used for outcomes as appropriate and using multiple imputation.
Of 751 patients, 402 were randomised between morphine (n=199) and hydromorphone (n=203). Baseline and intraoperative variables were comparable across the groups. The odds of achieving SAME were similar between the groups (odds ratio: 1.01; 95% confidence interval: 0.57–1.80). There were no differences in the side-effects of severe itching, respiratory depression, or sedation. Patient satisfaction, discharge times, and post-discharge outcomes, including pain and nausea/vomiting over 24 h, were also comparable.
There was no difference between morphine and hydromorphone regarding analgesia and common side-effects. The appearance of dose-limiting side-effects is idiosyncratic; the clinical decision must be based on individual responses.
NCT02223377.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-0912</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-6771</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2019.03.036</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31027915</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>ambulatory surgery ; analgesics ; hydromorphone ; morphine ; opioid ; postoperative nausea and vomiting ; side-effects</subject><ispartof>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA, 2019-06, Vol.122 (6), p.e107-e113</ispartof><rights>2019</rights><rights>Crown Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c396t-9a01c49eb0df79fe583410fe46319df6f14ac8dc147cca54db213f0e745a34153</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c396t-9a01c49eb0df79fe583410fe46319df6f14ac8dc147cca54db213f0e745a34153</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,27907,27908</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31027915$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Shanthanna, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paul, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lovrics, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vanniyasingam, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Devereaux, P.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bhandari, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thabane, L.</creatorcontrib><title>Satisfactory analgesia with minimal emesis in day surgeries: a randomised controlled trial of morphine versus hydromorphone</title><title>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</title><addtitle>Br J Anaesth</addtitle><description>Opioids remain the mainstay therapy for post-surgical pain. Although both morphine and hydromorphone are potent analgesics, it has been suggested that hydromorphone is clinically better. Our primary objective was to compare morphine with hydromorphone for achieving satisfactory analgesia with minimal emesis (SAME).
We performed a multicentre RCT in 402 patients having ambulatory surgery. A random computer-generated allocation, stratified by site, was developed by our pharmacy. Concealment was achieved by allocating patients to study groups by nurses using sequentially coded study medication syringes having equi-analgesic doses, made available in the postoperative recovery room. Patients, health providers, and research personnel were blinded. The operating-room protocol allowed for routine anaesthetic management, excluding the use of study medications. Study medications were administered by recovery nurses as per an algorithm. Analyses utilised the intention-to-treat principle, and regression analyses were used for outcomes as appropriate and using multiple imputation.
Of 751 patients, 402 were randomised between morphine (n=199) and hydromorphone (n=203). Baseline and intraoperative variables were comparable across the groups. The odds of achieving SAME were similar between the groups (odds ratio: 1.01; 95% confidence interval: 0.57–1.80). There were no differences in the side-effects of severe itching, respiratory depression, or sedation. Patient satisfaction, discharge times, and post-discharge outcomes, including pain and nausea/vomiting over 24 h, were also comparable.
There was no difference between morphine and hydromorphone regarding analgesia and common side-effects. The appearance of dose-limiting side-effects is idiosyncratic; the clinical decision must be based on individual responses.
NCT02223377.</description><subject>ambulatory surgery</subject><subject>analgesics</subject><subject>hydromorphone</subject><subject>morphine</subject><subject>opioid</subject><subject>postoperative nausea and vomiting</subject><subject>side-effects</subject><issn>0007-0912</issn><issn>1471-6771</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE9vEzEQxS1ERUPgA3BBPnLZMLPePzGcUEUBqVIPbc-WY48bR7t2sHdbRXz5Ok3hiGaksUbvPXl-jH1AWCFg93m32uz0qgaUKxClu1dsgU2PVdf3-JotAKCvQGJ9zt7mvAPAvpbtG3YuEOpeYrtgf2705LPTZorpwHXQwz1lr_mjn7Z89MGPeuA0ll3mPnCrDzzP6Z6Sp_yFa550sHH0mSw3MUwpDkN5TskXW3R8jGm_9YH4A6U8Z7492BSflzHQO3bm9JDp_ctcsrvL77cXP6ur6x-_Lr5dVUbIbqqkBjSNpA1Y10tH7Vo0CI6aTqC0rnPYaLO2plxujG4bu6lROKC-aXVRtmLJPp1y9yn-nilPqnzY0DDoQHHOqq6xq9eiK7VkeJKaFHNO5NQ-FQTpoBDUkbnaqcJcHZkrEKWPno8v8fNmJPvP8RdyEXw9Cagc-eApqWw8BUPWJzKTstH_J_4JlleUpA</recordid><startdate>201906</startdate><enddate>201906</enddate><creator>Shanthanna, H.</creator><creator>Paul, J.</creator><creator>Lovrics, P.</creator><creator>Vanniyasingam, T.</creator><creator>Devereaux, P.J.</creator><creator>Bhandari, M.</creator><creator>Thabane, L.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201906</creationdate><title>Satisfactory analgesia with minimal emesis in day surgeries: a randomised controlled trial of morphine versus hydromorphone</title><author>Shanthanna, H. ; Paul, J. ; Lovrics, P. ; Vanniyasingam, T. ; Devereaux, P.J. ; Bhandari, M. ; Thabane, L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c396t-9a01c49eb0df79fe583410fe46319df6f14ac8dc147cca54db213f0e745a34153</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>ambulatory surgery</topic><topic>analgesics</topic><topic>hydromorphone</topic><topic>morphine</topic><topic>opioid</topic><topic>postoperative nausea and vomiting</topic><topic>side-effects</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Shanthanna, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paul, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lovrics, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vanniyasingam, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Devereaux, P.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bhandari, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thabane, L.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Shanthanna, H.</au><au>Paul, J.</au><au>Lovrics, P.</au><au>Vanniyasingam, T.</au><au>Devereaux, P.J.</au><au>Bhandari, M.</au><au>Thabane, L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Satisfactory analgesia with minimal emesis in day surgeries: a randomised controlled trial of morphine versus hydromorphone</atitle><jtitle>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</jtitle><addtitle>Br J Anaesth</addtitle><date>2019-06</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>122</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>e107</spage><epage>e113</epage><pages>e107-e113</pages><issn>0007-0912</issn><eissn>1471-6771</eissn><abstract>Opioids remain the mainstay therapy for post-surgical pain. Although both morphine and hydromorphone are potent analgesics, it has been suggested that hydromorphone is clinically better. Our primary objective was to compare morphine with hydromorphone for achieving satisfactory analgesia with minimal emesis (SAME).
We performed a multicentre RCT in 402 patients having ambulatory surgery. A random computer-generated allocation, stratified by site, was developed by our pharmacy. Concealment was achieved by allocating patients to study groups by nurses using sequentially coded study medication syringes having equi-analgesic doses, made available in the postoperative recovery room. Patients, health providers, and research personnel were blinded. The operating-room protocol allowed for routine anaesthetic management, excluding the use of study medications. Study medications were administered by recovery nurses as per an algorithm. Analyses utilised the intention-to-treat principle, and regression analyses were used for outcomes as appropriate and using multiple imputation.
Of 751 patients, 402 were randomised between morphine (n=199) and hydromorphone (n=203). Baseline and intraoperative variables were comparable across the groups. The odds of achieving SAME were similar between the groups (odds ratio: 1.01; 95% confidence interval: 0.57–1.80). There were no differences in the side-effects of severe itching, respiratory depression, or sedation. Patient satisfaction, discharge times, and post-discharge outcomes, including pain and nausea/vomiting over 24 h, were also comparable.
There was no difference between morphine and hydromorphone regarding analgesia and common side-effects. The appearance of dose-limiting side-effects is idiosyncratic; the clinical decision must be based on individual responses.
NCT02223377.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>31027915</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.bja.2019.03.036</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0007-0912 |
ispartof | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA, 2019-06, Vol.122 (6), p.e107-e113 |
issn | 0007-0912 1471-6771 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2216283636 |
source | EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | ambulatory surgery analgesics hydromorphone morphine opioid postoperative nausea and vomiting side-effects |
title | Satisfactory analgesia with minimal emesis in day surgeries: a randomised controlled trial of morphine versus hydromorphone |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T05%3A02%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Satisfactory%20analgesia%20with%20minimal%20emesis%20in%20day%20surgeries:%20a%20randomised%20controlled%20trial%20of%20morphine%20versus%20hydromorphone&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20anaesthesia%20:%20BJA&rft.au=Shanthanna,%20H.&rft.date=2019-06&rft.volume=122&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=e107&rft.epage=e113&rft.pages=e107-e113&rft.issn=0007-0912&rft.eissn=1471-6771&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.bja.2019.03.036&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2216283636%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2216283636&rft_id=info:pmid/31027915&rft_els_id=S0007091219302417&rfr_iscdi=true |