Unknown

Dataset Information

0

Intranasal fentanyl spray versus intravenous opioids for the treatment of severe pain in patients with cancer in the emergency department setting: A randomized controlled trial.


ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:Intranasal fentanyl (INF) quickly and noninvasively relieves severe pain, whereas intravenous hydromorphone (IVH) reliably treats severe cancer pain but requires vascular access. The trial evaluated the efficacy of INF relative to IVH for treating cancer patients with severe pain in an emergency department (ED) setting. METHODS:We randomized 82 patients from a comprehensive cancer center ED to receive INF (n = 42) or IVH (n = 40). Eligible patients reported severe pain at randomization (?7, scale: 0 "none" to 10 "worst pain"). We conducted non-inferiority comparisons (non-inferiority margin = 0.9) of pain change from treatment initiation (T0) to one hour later (T60). T0 pain ratings were unavailable; therefore, we estimated T0 pain by comparing 1) T60 ratings, assuming similar group T0 ratings; 2) pain change, estimating T0 pain = randomization ratings, and 3) pain change, with T0 pain = 10 (IVH group) or T0 pain = randomization rating (INF group). RESULTS:At T60, the upper 90% confidence limit (CL) of the mean log-transformed pain ratings for the INF group exceeded the mean IVH group rating by 0.16 points (>pain). Substituting randomization ratings for T0 pain, the lower 90% CL of mean pain change in the INF group extended 0.32 points below (

SUBMITTER: Banala SR 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7351205 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Intranasal fentanyl spray versus intravenous opioids for the treatment of severe pain in patients with cancer in the emergency department setting: A randomized controlled trial.

Banala Srinivas R SR   Khattab Osama K OK   Page Valda D VD   Warneke Carla L CL   Todd Knox H KH   Yeung Sai-Ching Jim SJ  

PloS one 20200710 7


<h4>Objective</h4>Intranasal fentanyl (INF) quickly and noninvasively relieves severe pain, whereas intravenous hydromorphone (IVH) reliably treats severe cancer pain but requires vascular access. The trial evaluated the efficacy of INF relative to IVH for treating cancer patients with severe pain in an emergency department (ED) setting.<h4>Methods</h4>We randomized 82 patients from a comprehensive cancer center ED to receive INF (n = 42) or IVH (n = 40). Eligible patients reported severe pain a  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC10579725 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC3414794 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6534435 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4160729 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8943598 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5556593 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8249268 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6144484 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6764530 | biostudies-literature