Procedural sedation and analgesia versus nerve blocks for reduction of fractures and dislocations in the emergency department: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Author:

Kuypers Maybritt I.1,Veldhuis Lars I.2,Mencl Francis3,van Riel Anne4,Thijssen Wendy A. M. H.4,Tromp Ellen5,Goslings J. Carel6,Plötz Frans B.78

Affiliation:

1. Department of Emergency Medicine Amsterdam University Medical Center location Academisch Medisch Centrum Amsterdam the Netherlands

2. Department of Anesthesiology Amsterdam University Medical Center location Academisch Medisch Centrum Amsterdam the Netherlands

3. Department of Emergency Medicine Penn State University Milton Hershey Medical Center Hershey Pennsylvania USA

4. Department of Emergency Medicine Catharina Ziekenhuis Eindhoven the Netherlands

5. Department of Epidemiology and Statistics Sint Antonius Ziekenhuis Nieuwegein the Netherlands

6. Department of Traumatology Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis Amsterdam the Netherlands

7. Department of Pediatrics Tergooi Ziekenhuis Blaricum the Netherlands

8. Department of Pediatrics Amsterdam UMC, Emma Children's Hospital Amsterdam the Netherlands

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundProcedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) and peripheral nerve blocks (NBs) are techniques to manage pain and facilitate reduction of dislocated joints or fractures. However, it is unclear if either approach provides any distinct advantage in the emergency department (ED). The aim of this systematic review is to compare these 2 techniques on pain scores, adverse events, patient satisfaction, and length of stay (LOS) in the ED.MethodsWe performed an electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, and references were hand‐searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PSA with NBs for orthopedic reductions in the ED were included. Outcomes of interest included pain scores, adverse events, patient satisfaction, and LOS in the ED. A total of 2 reviewers independently screened abstracts and extracted data into a standardized form. The Cochrane risk‐of‐bias tool was used to evaluate study quality. The Grading of Recommendation Assessment Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess the certainty and strength of the evidence. Data on pain scores were pooled using a random‐effects model and are reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsA total of 6 RCTs (n = 256) were included in a qualitative review, and 4 RCTs (n = 101) were included in the meta‐analysis. There was no significant difference in pain scores between the PSA and NB groups (P = 0.47; SMD, 0.45; 95% CI, −0.78 to 1.69; I2 = 0.94). There were less adverse events in the NB group (0%–3.3%) compared with the PSA group (0%–20%; n = 256). LOS times were consistently shorter in the NB group (n = 215). Patient satisfaction was comparable in both groups (n = 196).ConclusionBased on the available evidence, NBs performed by emergency physicians are as effective as PSA in managing pain during orthopedic reductions in the ED. NBs are associated with fewer adverse events and shorter LOS in the ED. The quality of evidence is low.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Emergency Medicine

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3