ArticleAnesthesia, essays and researches
Effects of Intravenous and Inhaled Nebulized Lignocaine on the Hemodynamic Response of Endotracheal Intubation Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in Anesthesia, essays and researches. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndotracheal intubation is one of the most common measures in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) which plays an important role in airway management of the critically ill patients.
aimsThe study aimed to evaluate the effects of lignocaine spray on hemodynamic response of endotracheal intubation patients. SETTINGS AND
designThis study is a randomized clinical trial on a study population comprising patients admitted to the ICU. SUBJECTS AND
methodsThe patients were divided into three groups using a permuted block randomization. In Group 1, inhaled nebulized lignocaine 4% (75.0 mg/kg) was sprayed around the patients' epiglottis and larynx. In Group 2, intravenous (IV) lignocaine 2% (75.0/mg/kg) was injected. No lignocaine was prescribed for or administered to the control group. One and four minutes after intubation, the patients' hemodynamic and vital signs were measured. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Data analysis was run using Stata 13 software through repeated measure ANOVA tests.
resultsAlthough the mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) of Group 1 (inhaled nebulized lignocaine) was smaller than that of Group 2 (IV lignocaine), there was no significant difference between the two groups. Both groups' MAPs were significantly different from that of the control group. As for the average number of pulses, a significant difference was observed between the inhaled and IV lignocaine groups; hence, the average number of pulses in Group 1 (inhalation) was lower than that of Group 2 (IV injection).
conclusionAs blood pressure is considered to be normal under 140/90 and may not entail any hemodynamic complications, it can be concluded that inhaled nebulized lignocaine can control the hemodynamic changes of intubation more effectively than IV lignocaine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.