4.6 Article

The comparative evaluation of gabapentin and carbamazepine for pain management in Guillain-Barre syndrome patients in the intensive care unit

Journal

ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA
Volume 101, Issue 1, Pages 220-225

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000152186.89020.36

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We evaluated the effects of gabapentin and carbamazepine for pain relief in 36 Guillain-Barre syndrome patients. Patients were randomly assigned to receive gabapentin 300 mg, carbamazepine 100 mg, or matching placebo 3 times a day for 7 days. Fentanyl 2 mu g/kg was used as a supplementary analgesic on patient demand. The pain score was recorded by using a numeric pain rating scale of 0-10, and sedation was recorded with a Ramsay sedation scale of 1-6 before medications were given and then at 6-h intervals throughout the study period. Total daily fentanyl consumption was recorded each day for each patient. The results of the study demonstrated that patients in the gabapentin group had significantly lower (P < 0.05) median numeric pain rating scale scores (3.5, 2.5, 2.0, 2.0, 2.0, 2.0, and 2.0) compared with patients in the placebo group (6.0,6.0,6.0,6.0,6.0,6.0, and 6.0) and the carbamazepine group (6.0, 6.0, 5.0, 4.0, 4.0, 3.5, and 3.0). There was no significant difference in fentanyl consumption between the gabapentin and carbamazepine groups on Day 1 (340.1 +/- 34.3 mu g and 347.5 +/- 38.0 mu g, respectively), but consumption was significantly less in these 2 groups compared with the placebo group (590.4 +/- 35.0 mu g) (P < 0.05). For the rest of the study period, there was a significant difference in fentanyl consumption among all treatment groups, and it was minimal in the gabapentin group (P < 0.05). We conclude that gabapentin is more effective than carbamazepine for decreasing pain and fentanyl consumption.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available