Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorZhu, Chengyong
dc.contributor.authorRockett, M
dc.contributor.authorCreanor, Siobhan
dc.contributor.authorSquire, R
dc.contributor.authorHayward, C
dc.contributor.authorEwings, P
dc.contributor.authorbarton, andy
dc.contributor.authorPritchard, C
dc.contributor.authorEyre, V
dc.contributor.authorCocking, Laura
dc.contributor.authorBenger, J
dc.date.accessioned2015-07-01T10:18:48Z
dc.date.accessioned2015-09-02T10:44:30Z
dc.date.available2015-07-01T10:18:48Z
dc.date.available2015-09-02T10:44:30Z
dc.date.issued2015-06-21
dc.identifier.issn0959-8138
dc.identifier.issn1756-1833
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/3536
dc.description.abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patient controlled analgesia (PCA) is better than routine care in providing effective analgesia for patients presenting to emergency departments with moderate to severe non-traumatic abdominal pain. DESIGN: Pragmatic, multicentre, parallel group, randomised controlled trial SETTING: Five English hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: 200 adults (66% (n=130) female), aged 18 to 75 years, who presented to the emergency department requiring intravenous opioid analgesia for the treatment of moderate to severe non-traumatic abdominal pain and were expected to be admitted to hospital for at least 12 hours. INTERVENTIONS: Patient controlled analgesia or nurse titrated analgesia (treatment as usual). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was total pain experienced over the 12 hour study period, derived by standardised area under the curve (scaled from 0 to 100) of each participant's hourly pain scores, captured using a visual analogue scale. Pre-specified secondary outcomes included total morphine use, percentage of study period in moderate or severe pain, percentage of study period asleep, length of hospital stay, and satisfaction with pain management. RESULTS: 196 participants were included in the primary analyses (99 allocated to PCA and 97 to treatment as usual). Mean total pain experienced was 35.3 (SD 25.8) in the PCA group compared with 47.3 (24.7) in the treatment as usual group. The adjusted between group difference was 6.3 (95% confidence interval 0.7 to 11.9). Participants in the PCA group received significantly more morphine (mean 36.1 (SD 22.4) v 23.6 (13.1) mg; mean difference 12.3 (95% confidence interval 7.2 to 17.4) mg), spent less of the study period in moderate or severe pain (32.6% v 46.9%; mean difference 14.5% (5.6% to 23.5%)), and were more likely to be perfectly or very satisfied with the management of their pain (83% (73/88) v 66% (57/87); adjusted odds ratio 2.56 (1.25 to 5.23)) in comparison with participants in the treatment as usual group. CONCLUSIONS: Significant reductions in pain can be achieved by PCA compared with treatment as usual in patients presenting to the emergency department with non-traumatic abdominal pain. Trial registration European Clinical Trials Database EudraCT2011-000194-31; Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN25343280.

dc.format.extenth3147-h3147
dc.format.mediumElectronic
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherBMJ
dc.relation.replaceshttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/3386
dc.relation.replaces10026.1/3386
dc.subjectAbdominal Pain
dc.subjectAdolescent
dc.subjectAdult
dc.subjectAged
dc.subjectAnalgesia, Patient-Controlled
dc.subjectEmergency Service, Hospital
dc.subjectEmergency Treatment
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectMiddle Aged
dc.subjectPain Management
dc.subjectYoung Adult
dc.titlePAin SoluTions In the Emergency Setting (PASTIES)--patient controlled analgesia versus routine care in emergency department patients with non-traumatic abdominal pain: randomised trial
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeComparative Study
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.typeMulticenter Study
dc.typeRandomized Controlled Trial
dc.typeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26094712
plymouth.issuejun19 1
plymouth.volume350
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalBMJ
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/bmj.h3147
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/Peninsula Medical School
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/Peninsula Medical School/PMS - Manual
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA03 Allied Health Professions, Dentistry, Nursing and Pharmacy
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Health and Community
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)/CBBB
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)/CCT&PS
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Plymouth Institute of Health and Care Research (PIHR)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dc.publisher.placeEngland
dc.identifier.eissn1756-1833
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1136/bmj.h3147
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV