CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Weller, R.
Right arrow Articles by Gross, J. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Weller, R.
Right arrow Articles by Gross, J. B.

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 38, 582-586, Copyright © 1991 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society

ARTICLES

Comparison of epidural and patient-controlled intravenous morphine following joint replacement surgery

R Weller, M Rosenblum, P Conard and JB Gross
Department of Anesthesiology, University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington 06032.

The authors conducted a randomized, prospective study comparing epidural morphine with patient-controlled intravenous (iv) morphine in 30 patients recovering from total hip or total knee arthroplasty. Six, 18, and 24 hr postoperatively, patients used a 10 cm visual-analogue scale to indicate both their current degree of discomfort and the maximum discomfort they had experienced since the previous evaluation. Pain at the time of evaluation did not differ between patients receiving epidural (2.6 +/- 0.4 cm, mean +/- SEM) and patient-controlled iv morphine (3.4 +/- 0.3 cm). However, patients who received epidural morphine recalled less pain during the period preceding evaluation (4.2 +/- 0.5 cm) than did those receiving patient-controlled analgesia (5.5 +/- 0.4 cm, P less than 0.05). Patients receiving epidural morphine were more likely to require treatment for pruritus (4 of 15) than patients who received patient-controlled iv morphine (none of 15, P less than 0.05). Minimum respiratory rates were lower in patients receiving epidural morphine (15.0 +/- 0.3) than in those receiving patient-controlled analgesia (16.5 +/- 0.4, P less than 0.05), but no patients required treatment for respiratory depression. The authors conclude that epidural morphine may provide more consistent analgesia following joint replacement surgery than patient-controlled morphine; however, there is a higher incidence of side-effects with the epidural technique.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Am Acad Orthop SurgHome page
T. T. Horlocker, S. L. Kopp, M. W. Pagnano, and J. R. Hebl
Analgesia for total hip and knee arthroplasty: a multimodal pathway featuring peripheral nerve block.
J. Am. Acad. Ortho. Surg., March 1, 2006; 14(3): 126 - 135.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
C. T. Hartrick, G. Martin, G. Kantor, J. Koncelik, and G. Manvelian
Evaluation of a Single-Dose, Extended-Release Epidural Morphine Formulation for Pain After Knee Arthroplasty
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., February 1, 2006; 88(2): 273 - 281.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
F. J. Singelyn, P. E. Vanderelst, and J.-M. A. Gouverneur
Extended Femoral Nerve Sheath Block After Total Hip Arthroplasty: Continuous Versus Patient-Controlled Techniques
Anesth. Analg., February 1, 2001; 92(2): 455 - 459.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1991 by the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.