Skip to main content
Erschienen in: European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology 8/2017

15.05.2017 | Rhinology

A study evaluating the effects of throat packs during nasal surgery: a randomised controlled trial

verfasst von: Ali Al-lami, Kwamena Amonoo-Kuofi, Praneta Kulloo, Raj Lakhani, Navin Prakash, Nazir Bhat

Erschienen in: European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology | Ausgabe 8/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The aims of this study were to identify differences in post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and throat pain between throat packed and non-packed patient groups in nasal surgery. This was a prospective, double blind, randomised controlled trial. A water-soaked throat pack gauze was inserted in the mouth to occlude the oropharynx was used in the throat pack group. The second group received no throat pack. A validated PONV questionnaire was completed 6 h post-operatively. Visual analogue scores (VAS) for throat pain were completed in recovery, 2, and 6 h post-operatively. 80 patients were enrolled (40 into each group based on power calculation). With regard to the primary outcome measure, mean PONV score for the throat pack group was 2.75 [median 0, standard deviation (SD 10.86)] and the mean PONV score for the non-packed group was 0.36 (median 0, SD 1.39). The difference in PONV was not statistically significant [P value 0.375, 95% confidence interval (CI) −1.19 to 3.32]. With regard to throat pain VAS scores (our secondary outcome measure), in recovery, the mean throat pain VAS score for the throat packed group was 2.5 (median 1, SD 2.8) and the mean throat pain VAS score for the non-throat packed group was 1.3 (median 0, SD 2.5). Statistical analysis showed a significant difference between the two groups with the throat pack group experiencing more throat pain in recovery (P value 0.018 (95% CI 1.13–2.52). At 2 and 6 h post-operatively, the mean throat pain VAS scores for the throat packed group were 2.1 and 2.3, respectively, and the mean throat pain VAS score for the non-throat packed group was 2.3 and 1.4, respectively. Statistical analysis showed non-significant difference between the two groups at 2 and 6 h post-operatively. The use of throat packs in nasal surgery does not confer PONV reduction benefit. The use of throat pack, however, is associated with a small but statistically significant more throat pain in the initial recovery period from nasal operations.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Conway CM, Miller JS, Sugden FLH (1960) Sore throat after anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 32:219–223CrossRefPubMed Conway CM, Miller JS, Sugden FLH (1960) Sore throat after anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 32:219–223CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Edmuds-Seal J, Eve JH (1962) Minor sequelae anaesthesia: a pilot study. Br J Anaesth 34:44–48CrossRef Edmuds-Seal J, Eve JH (1962) Minor sequelae anaesthesia: a pilot study. Br J Anaesth 34:44–48CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Hartsell CJ, Stephen CR (1964) Incidence of sore throat following endotracheal intubation. Can J Anaesth 11:307–312CrossRef Hartsell CJ, Stephen CR (1964) Incidence of sore throat following endotracheal intubation. Can J Anaesth 11:307–312CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Jaiswal V, Bedford GC (2009) Review of nasal packs in nasal surgery. JLO 123:701–704CrossRef Jaiswal V, Bedford GC (2009) Review of nasal packs in nasal surgery. JLO 123:701–704CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Colbert S, Jackson M, Turner M, Brennan PA (2012) Reducing the risk of retained throat packs after surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 50:680–681CrossRefPubMed Colbert S, Jackson M, Turner M, Brennan PA (2012) Reducing the risk of retained throat packs after surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 50:680–681CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Erkalp K, Korkut YA, Meric A, Kahya V, Gedikli O, Su OK, Saitoglu L (2010) Pharyngeal packing is a predisposing factor for postoperative aphthous stomatitis in nasal surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 142:672–676CrossRefPubMed Erkalp K, Korkut YA, Meric A, Kahya V, Gedikli O, Su OK, Saitoglu L (2010) Pharyngeal packing is a predisposing factor for postoperative aphthous stomatitis in nasal surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 142:672–676CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Christensen AM, Willemoes-Larsen H, Lundby L, Jakobsen KB (1994) Postoperative throat complaints after tracheal intubation. Br J Anaesth 73:786–787CrossRefPubMed Christensen AM, Willemoes-Larsen H, Lundby L, Jakobsen KB (1994) Postoperative throat complaints after tracheal intubation. Br J Anaesth 73:786–787CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Wengritzky R, Mettho T, Myles PS, Burke J, Kakos A (2010) Development and validation of a postoperative nausea and vomiting intensity scale. Br J Anaesth 104:158–166CrossRefPubMed Wengritzky R, Mettho T, Myles PS, Burke J, Kakos A (2010) Development and validation of a postoperative nausea and vomiting intensity scale. Br J Anaesth 104:158–166CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Repanos C, McDonald SE, Sadr AH (2009) A survey of postoperative nasal packing among UK ENT surgeons. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 266:1575CrossRefPubMed Repanos C, McDonald SE, Sadr AH (2009) A survey of postoperative nasal packing among UK ENT surgeons. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 266:1575CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Marais J, Prescott RJ (1993) Throat pain and pharyngeal packing: a controlled randomized double-blind comparison between gauze and tampons. Clin Otolaryngol 18:426–429CrossRefPubMed Marais J, Prescott RJ (1993) Throat pain and pharyngeal packing: a controlled randomized double-blind comparison between gauze and tampons. Clin Otolaryngol 18:426–429CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Elhakim M, Siam A, Rahsed I, Hamdy MH (2000) Topical tenox- icam from pharyngeal pack reduces post operative sore throat. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 44:273–277 Elhakim M, Siam A, Rahsed I, Hamdy MH (2000) Topical tenox- icam from pharyngeal pack reduces post operative sore throat. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 44:273–277
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Basha SI, McCoy E, Ullah R, Kinsella JB (2006) The efficacy of pharyngeal packing during routine nasal surgery—a prospective randomised controlled study. Anaesthesia 61:1161–1165CrossRefPubMed Basha SI, McCoy E, Ullah R, Kinsella JB (2006) The efficacy of pharyngeal packing during routine nasal surgery—a prospective randomised controlled study. Anaesthesia 61:1161–1165CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Piltcher O, Levinksy M, de Oliverio Levinsky J, Basso PR (2007) Effectiveness of hypopharyngeal packing during nasal and sinus surgery in the prevention of PONV. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 137:552–554CrossRefPubMed Piltcher O, Levinksy M, de Oliverio Levinsky J, Basso PR (2007) Effectiveness of hypopharyngeal packing during nasal and sinus surgery in the prevention of PONV. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 137:552–554CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Karbasforushan A, Hemmatpoor B, Makhsosi BR, Mahavar T, Golfam P, Khiabani B (2014) The Effect of Pharyngeal Packing during Nasal Surgery on the Incidence of Post Operative Nausea, Vomiting, and Sore Throat. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol 26:219–223PubMedPubMedCentral Karbasforushan A, Hemmatpoor B, Makhsosi BR, Mahavar T, Golfam P, Khiabani B (2014) The Effect of Pharyngeal Packing during Nasal Surgery on the Incidence of Post Operative Nausea, Vomiting, and Sore Throat. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol 26:219–223PubMedPubMedCentral
Metadaten
Titel
A study evaluating the effects of throat packs during nasal surgery: a randomised controlled trial
verfasst von
Ali Al-lami
Kwamena Amonoo-Kuofi
Praneta Kulloo
Raj Lakhani
Navin Prakash
Nazir Bhat
Publikationsdatum
15.05.2017
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology / Ausgabe 8/2017
Print ISSN: 0937-4477
Elektronische ISSN: 1434-4726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-017-4589-5

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 8/2017

European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology 8/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Update HNO

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.