These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A randomized controlled trial of intranasal fentanyl vs intravenous morphine for analgesia in the prehospital setting.
    Author: Rickard C, O'Meara P, McGrail M, Garner D, McLean A, Le Lievre P.
    Journal: Am J Emerg Med; 2007 Oct; 25(8):911-7. PubMed ID: 17920976.
    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 mug +/- 2 doses of 60 mug at > or =5-minute intervals or IVM 2.5 to 5 mg +/- 2 doses of 2.5 to 5 mg at > or =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.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]