Cargando…
Effect of Transdermal Fentanyl Patch Combined with Enhanced Recovery after Surgery on the Curative Effect and Analgesic Effect of Liver Cancer
Its goal was to see how a transdermal fentanyl patch combined with accelerated recovery after surgery (ERAS) affected the treatment efficacy and analgesic effect of liver cancer, as well as to help patients with liver cancer choose the right analgesic treatment and nursing mode. 150 patients with li...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9343188/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35924273 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/9722458 |
Sumario: | Its goal was to see how a transdermal fentanyl patch combined with accelerated recovery after surgery (ERAS) affected the treatment efficacy and analgesic effect of liver cancer, as well as to help patients with liver cancer choose the right analgesic treatment and nursing mode. 150 patients with liver cancer were divided into group A (transdermal fentanyl patch), group B (ERAS), and group C (transdermal fentanyl patch combined with ERAS). Patients in the three groups were compared in terms of pain, survival, psychological status, adverse responses, postoperative recovery, and patient satisfaction. The results showed that under different treatment and nursing methods, the number of patients with mild cancer pain in the three groups was increased, especially the number of patients with mild cancer pain in group C (P < 0.05). Besides, the quality of life score of patients in each group was decreased. Patients who received the combination analgesia had a significantly higher quality of life than those who received simply a transdermal fentanyl patch or ERAS (P < 0.05). The scores of both the Hamilton anxiety scale (HAMA) and Hamilton depression rating scale (HAMD) of patients with the combined analgesia were decreased signally (P < 0.05). There were few patients with combined analgesia who had adverse reactions (P < 0.05). After surgery, the time of the first anal exhaust, first defecation, and first ambulation in group C were shorter than those in the other two groups (P < 0.05). To summarize, combining the two techniques aided in the recovery of gastrointestinal function as well as the physical recovery of patients following surgery. Furthermore, combining the two approaches produced a clear analgesic impact, which could improve patients' quality of life while also having a favorable clinical adoption effect. |
---|