Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2024
Effect of two different doses of nalbuphine for postoperative analgesia in children with cleft palate: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2024. 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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCleft palate repair surgery may result in severe pain in the immediate postoperative period. The aim of this study is to compare the effects of different doses of nalbuphine for postoperative analgesia in children with cleft palate.
methodsFrom November 2019 to June 2021, 90 children (45 males and 45 females, age 9-20 months old, ASA class I-II) were selected for palatoplasty. They were randomly divided into three groups: the control group (Group C), the N1 group (postoperative analgesia with 0.05 mg/kg/h nalbuphine) and the N2 group (postoperative analgesia with 0.075 mg/kg/h nalbuphine). Each group had 30 cases. Nalbuphine was not continuously infused in Group C but was continuously infused in Groups N1 and N2 at rates of 0.05 mg/kg/h and 0.075 mg/kg/h, respectively, for 24 h for postoperative analgesia. The FLACC analgesia score and Ramsay Sedation score were recorded at 10 min (T1), 30 min (T2), 2 h (T3), 12 h (T4) and 24 h (T5) after the operation. Adverse reactions such as nausea, vomiting and respiratory depression were observed and recorded.
resultsCompared with those in Group C, the FLACC scores in the N1 and N2 groups decreased significantly at T1-T5 (p < 0.05); the Ramsay Sedation score in the N1 group was significantly higher at T3 and T4 (p < 0.05), and that in the N2 group was significantly higher at T1-T5 (p < 0.05). Compared with that in the N1 group, the FLACC score in the N2 group was not significantly different, and the Ramsay Sedation score increased significantly at T5 (p < 0.05).
conclusionUsing 0.05 mg/kg/h Nalbuphine continuously for 24 h for postoperative analgesia in children with cleft palate has a better effect and fewer adverse reactions.
trial registrationThis study was registered at ChiCTR1900027385 (11/11/2019).
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.