Randomized clinical trial of efficacy and safety of a single 2-mg intravenous dose of hydromorphone versus usual care in the management of acute pain

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives The objective was to test the efficacy and safety of 2 mg of intravenous (IV) hydromorphone (Dilaudid) against "usual care" in emergency department (ED) patients with acute severe pain. Methods This was a randomized clinical trial. Patients allocated to 2 mg of IV hydromorphone received their medication in a single dose. Those randomized to usual care received any IV opioid, with type, dose, and frequency chosen by the ED attending. All patients received 2 L/min. nasal cannula oxygen. The primary outcome was the difference in the proportion of patients who achieved clinically satisfactory analgesia by 30 minutes. This was defined as the patient declining additional analgesia when asked the question, "Do you want more pain medicine?" A 10% absolute difference was chosen a priori as the minimum difference considered clinically significant. Results Of 175 subjects randomized to each group, 164 in the 2 mg hydromorphone group and 161 in the usual care group had sufficient data for analysis. Additional pain medication was declined by 77.4% of patients in the 2 mg hydromorphone group at 30 minutes, compared to 65.8% in the usual care group. This difference of 11.6% was statistically and clinically significant (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.8% to 21.1%). Safety profiles were similar and no patient required naloxone. There was more pruritus in the hydromorphone group (18.3% vs. 8.7%; difference = 9.6%, 95% CI = 2.6% to 16.6%). Conclusions Using a simple dichotomous patient-centered endpoint in which a difference of 10% in proportion obtaining adequate analgesia was considered clinically significant, 2 mg of hydromorphone in a single IV dose is clinically and statistically more efficacious when compared to usual care for acute pain management in the ED.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)185-192
Number of pages8
JournalAcademic Emergency Medicine
Volume20
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2013

Fingerprint

Hydromorphone
Acute Pain
Randomized Controlled Trials
Safety
Analgesia
Hospital Emergency Service
Confidence Intervals
Pain
antineoplaston A10
Pain Management
Pruritus
Naloxone
Opioid Analgesics
Medicine
Oxygen

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Emergency Medicine

Cite this

@article{18bf842fbac04e07a485094c566b21ee,
title = "Randomized clinical trial of efficacy and safety of a single 2-mg intravenous dose of hydromorphone versus usual care in the management of acute pain",
abstract = "Objectives The objective was to test the efficacy and safety of 2 mg of intravenous (IV) hydromorphone (Dilaudid) against {"}usual care{"} in emergency department (ED) patients with acute severe pain. Methods This was a randomized clinical trial. Patients allocated to 2 mg of IV hydromorphone received their medication in a single dose. Those randomized to usual care received any IV opioid, with type, dose, and frequency chosen by the ED attending. All patients received 2 L/min. nasal cannula oxygen. The primary outcome was the difference in the proportion of patients who achieved clinically satisfactory analgesia by 30 minutes. This was defined as the patient declining additional analgesia when asked the question, {"}Do you want more pain medicine?{"} A 10{\%} absolute difference was chosen a priori as the minimum difference considered clinically significant. Results Of 175 subjects randomized to each group, 164 in the 2 mg hydromorphone group and 161 in the usual care group had sufficient data for analysis. Additional pain medication was declined by 77.4{\%} of patients in the 2 mg hydromorphone group at 30 minutes, compared to 65.8{\%} in the usual care group. This difference of 11.6{\%} was statistically and clinically significant (95{\%} confidence interval [CI] = 1.8{\%} to 21.1{\%}). Safety profiles were similar and no patient required naloxone. There was more pruritus in the hydromorphone group (18.3{\%} vs. 8.7{\%}; difference = 9.6{\%}, 95{\%} CI = 2.6{\%} to 16.6{\%}). Conclusions Using a simple dichotomous patient-centered endpoint in which a difference of 10{\%} in proportion obtaining adequate analgesia was considered clinically significant, 2 mg of hydromorphone in a single IV dose is clinically and statistically more efficacious when compared to usual care for acute pain management in the ED.",
author = "Chang, {Andrew K.} and Bijur, {Polly E.} and Lupow, {Jason B.} and Gallagher, {E. John}",
year = "2013",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1111/acem.12071",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "185--192",
journal = "Academic Emergency Medicine",
issn = "1069-6563",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Randomized clinical trial of efficacy and safety of a single 2-mg intravenous dose of hydromorphone versus usual care in the management of acute pain

AU - Chang, Andrew K.

AU - Bijur, Polly E.

AU - Lupow, Jason B.

AU - Gallagher, E. John

PY - 2013/2

Y1 - 2013/2

N2 - Objectives The objective was to test the efficacy and safety of 2 mg of intravenous (IV) hydromorphone (Dilaudid) against "usual care" in emergency department (ED) patients with acute severe pain. Methods This was a randomized clinical trial. Patients allocated to 2 mg of IV hydromorphone received their medication in a single dose. Those randomized to usual care received any IV opioid, with type, dose, and frequency chosen by the ED attending. All patients received 2 L/min. nasal cannula oxygen. The primary outcome was the difference in the proportion of patients who achieved clinically satisfactory analgesia by 30 minutes. This was defined as the patient declining additional analgesia when asked the question, "Do you want more pain medicine?" A 10% absolute difference was chosen a priori as the minimum difference considered clinically significant. Results Of 175 subjects randomized to each group, 164 in the 2 mg hydromorphone group and 161 in the usual care group had sufficient data for analysis. Additional pain medication was declined by 77.4% of patients in the 2 mg hydromorphone group at 30 minutes, compared to 65.8% in the usual care group. This difference of 11.6% was statistically and clinically significant (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.8% to 21.1%). Safety profiles were similar and no patient required naloxone. There was more pruritus in the hydromorphone group (18.3% vs. 8.7%; difference = 9.6%, 95% CI = 2.6% to 16.6%). Conclusions Using a simple dichotomous patient-centered endpoint in which a difference of 10% in proportion obtaining adequate analgesia was considered clinically significant, 2 mg of hydromorphone in a single IV dose is clinically and statistically more efficacious when compared to usual care for acute pain management in the ED.

AB - Objectives The objective was to test the efficacy and safety of 2 mg of intravenous (IV) hydromorphone (Dilaudid) against "usual care" in emergency department (ED) patients with acute severe pain. Methods This was a randomized clinical trial. Patients allocated to 2 mg of IV hydromorphone received their medication in a single dose. Those randomized to usual care received any IV opioid, with type, dose, and frequency chosen by the ED attending. All patients received 2 L/min. nasal cannula oxygen. The primary outcome was the difference in the proportion of patients who achieved clinically satisfactory analgesia by 30 minutes. This was defined as the patient declining additional analgesia when asked the question, "Do you want more pain medicine?" A 10% absolute difference was chosen a priori as the minimum difference considered clinically significant. Results Of 175 subjects randomized to each group, 164 in the 2 mg hydromorphone group and 161 in the usual care group had sufficient data for analysis. Additional pain medication was declined by 77.4% of patients in the 2 mg hydromorphone group at 30 minutes, compared to 65.8% in the usual care group. This difference of 11.6% was statistically and clinically significant (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.8% to 21.1%). Safety profiles were similar and no patient required naloxone. There was more pruritus in the hydromorphone group (18.3% vs. 8.7%; difference = 9.6%, 95% CI = 2.6% to 16.6%). Conclusions Using a simple dichotomous patient-centered endpoint in which a difference of 10% in proportion obtaining adequate analgesia was considered clinically significant, 2 mg of hydromorphone in a single IV dose is clinically and statistically more efficacious when compared to usual care for acute pain management in the ED.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84873918584&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84873918584&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/acem.12071

DO - 10.1111/acem.12071

M3 - Article

C2 - 23406078

AN - SCOPUS:84873918584

VL - 20

SP - 185

EP - 192

JO - Academic Emergency Medicine

JF - Academic Emergency Medicine

SN - 1069-6563

IS - 2

ER -