Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Chem Commun (Camb) ; 55(55): 8001-8004, 2019 Jul 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31225547

RESUMEN

We report the first method to introduce differential functionalities in the interior pore walls and exterior surface of highly stable thermally hydrocarbonised porous silicon (THCpSi) films. The approach exploits the hydrophobicity of the hydrosilylated THCpSi to, first, selectively functionalise the external surface, and subsequently derivatise the hydrophobic internal pore walls.

2.
Am J Emerg Med ; 32(6): 655-9, 2014 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24613655

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Midazolam comedication with morphine is a routine practice in pre and postoperative patients but has not been evaluated in prehospital setting. We aimed to evaluate the comedication effect of midazolam in the prehospital traumatic adults. METHODS: A prehospital prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of intravenous morphine 0.10 mg/kg and midazolam 0.04 mg/kg vs morphine 0.10 mg/kg and placebo. Pain assessment was done using a validated numeric rating scale (NRS). The primary end point was to achieve an efficient analgesic effect (NRS≤3) 20 minutes after the baseline. The secondary end points were treatment safety, total morphine dose required until obtaining NRS≤3, and efficient analgesic effect 30 minutes after the baseline. FINDINGS: Ninety-one patients were randomized into midazolam (n=41) and placebo (n=50) groups. No significant difference in proportion of patients with a pain score≤3 was observed between midazolam (43.6%) and placebo (45.7%) after 20 minutes (P=.849). Secondary end points were similar in regard with proportion of patients with a pain score≤3 at T30, the side effects and adverse events except for drowsiness in midazolam vs placebo, 43.6% vs 6.5% (P<.001). No significant difference in total morphine dose was observed, that is, midazolam (14.09 mg±6.64) vs placebo (15.53 mg±6.27) (P=.315). CONCLUSIONS: According to our study, midazolam does not enhance pain control as an adjunctive to morphine regimen in the management of trauma-induced pain in prehospital setting. However, such midazolam use seems to be associated with an increase in drowsiness.


Asunto(s)
Dolor Agudo/tratamiento farmacológico , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia/métodos , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/uso terapéutico , Midazolam/uso terapéutico , Manejo del Dolor/métodos , Heridas y Lesiones/tratamiento farmacológico , Dolor Agudo/etiología , Adulto , Analgésicos Opioides/administración & dosificación , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapéutico , Método Doble Ciego , Sinergismo Farmacológico , Quimioterapia Combinada , Femenino , Humanos , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/administración & dosificación , Masculino , Midazolam/administración & dosificación , Morfina/administración & dosificación , Morfina/uso terapéutico , Heridas y Lesiones/complicaciones
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA