Skip Navigation

European Heart Journal 1987 8(6):597-602;
Copyright © 1987 by the European Society of Cardiology.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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 Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jamidar, H. A.
Right arrow Articles by Adgey, A. A. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jamidar, H. A.
Right arrow Articles by Adgey, A. A. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1987 The European Society of Cardiology

Nalbuphine versus diamorphine early in the course of suspected myocardial infarction

H. A. Jamidar, S. W. Crooks and A. A. J. Adgey

Regional Medical Cardiology Centre, Royal Victoria Hospital Belfast BT12 6BA, Northern Ireland

Received 22 August 1986; revised 31 October 1986; .

Dr A. A J. Adgey, MD, FRCP, FACC, Consultant Cardiologist, Regional Medical Cardiology Centre, Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast BT12 6BA.

Abstract

One hundred and seventy-six consecutive patients with moderate or severe pain of suspected myocardial infarction were randomized to receive nalbuphine ≥ 20 mg or diamorphine ≥ 5 mg intravenously with metoclopramide 10 mg and were observed over 2 hours. One hundred and forty-two patients (81%) received the test drug outside hospital. The median time from symptom onset to treatment was 135 minutes for the nalbuphine group and 125 minutes for the diamorphine group. Satisfactory pain relief (grade 0 or 1) was similar for both groups at each time assessment. In particular, within 10 minutes of the drug‘s administration 77% of those receiving nalbuphine and 68% who received diamorphine had satisfactory pain relief. The number of doses of each drug, the number of patients withdrawn from the trial because of unsatisfactory pain relief or recurrence of chest pain were similar for both groups. For those with myocardial infarction there was similar satisfactory pain relief with nalbuphine as diamorphine. No significant deleterious haemodynamic effects or other sideeffects occurred. The noncontrolled classification and low addiction potential of nalbuphine allow for its more widespread use in the control of pain of suspected myocardial infarction.

Key Words: Nalbuphine • diamorphine • early myocardial infarction


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Emerg. Med. J.Home page
M Woollard, R Whitfield, K Smith, T Jones, G Thomas, G Thomas, and C Hinton
Less IS less: a randomised controlled trial comparing cautious and rapid nalbuphine dosing regimens
Emerg. Med. J., May 1, 2004; 21(3): 362 - 364.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.