A randomized controlled trial of intranasal fentanyl vs intravenous morphine for analgesia in the prehospital setting
File version
Author(s)
O'Meara, Peter
McGrail, Matthew
Garner, David
McLean, Alan
Le Lievre, Peter
Griffith University Author(s)
Primary Supervisor
Other Supervisors
Editor(s)
Date
Size
105302 bytes
File type(s)
application/pdf
Location
License
Abstract
Study Objective The objective of the study was to compare intranasal fentanyl (INF) with intravenous morphine (IVM) for prehospital analgesia. Methods This was a randomized, controlled, open-label trial. Consecutive adult patients (n = 258) requiring analgesia (Verbal Rating Score [VRS] >2/10 noncardiac or >5/10 cardiac) were recruited. Patients received INF 180 姠ᠲ doses of 60 姠at =5-minute intervals or IVM 2.5 to 5 mg ᠲ doses of 2.5 to 5 mg at =5-minute intervals. The end point was the difference in baseline/destination VRS. Results Groups were equivalent (P = not significant) for baseline VRS [mean (SD): INF 8.3 (1.7), IVM 8.1 (1.6)] and minutes to destination [mean (SD): INF 27.2 (15.5), IVM 30.6 (19.1)]. Patients had a mean (95% confidence interval) VRS reduction as follows: INF 4.22 (3.74-4.71), IVM 3.57 (3.10-4.03); P = .08. Higher baseline VRS (P < .001), no methoxyflurane use (P < .01), and back pain (P = .02) predicted VRS reduction. Safety and acceptability were comparable. Conclusions There was no significant difference in the effectiveness of INF and IVM for prehospital analgesia.
Journal Title
American Journal of Emergency Medicine
Conference Title
Book Title
Edition
Volume
25
Issue
8
Thesis Type
Degree Program
School
Publisher link
Patent number
Funder(s)
Grant identifier(s)
Rights Statement
Rights Statement
© 2007 Elsevier. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal's website for access to the definitive, published version.
Item Access Status
Note
Access the data
Related item(s)
Subject
Clinical sciences