Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1995 Mar;7(2):141-7.
doi: 10.1016/0952-8180(94)00041-2.

Antiemetic efficacy of a droperidol-morphine combination in patient-controlled analgesia

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Antiemetic efficacy of a droperidol-morphine combination in patient-controlled analgesia

R McKenzie et al. J Clin Anesth. 1995 Mar.

Abstract

Study objectives: To evaluate the antiemetic effectiveness and side effects of adding low-dose droperidol to morphine delivered via a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device.

Design: Randomized, double-blind, clinical study.

Setting: University-affiliated women's hospital.

Patients: 60 healthy women, 18 to 60 years of age, who underwent total abdominal hysterectomy with a standardized anesthetic regime.

Interventions: After surgery, the control group (n = 20) had access via PCA to two cartridges, each containing morphine 1 mg/ml and saline 1 ml. The two treated groups (n = 20 each) had access via PCA to either droperidol 0.5 mg or droperidol 1 mg added to two cartridges containing morphine 1 mg/ml.

Measurements and main results: Preoperative data, including each patient's history of nausea and vomiting with and without previous anesthesia, motion sickness, smoking, and alcohol intake, and date of her last menstrual period, were obtained. All patients received a standardized anesthetic with droperidol 0.5 mg given at closure of the peritoneum. Among those patients who received droperidol added to morphine for their postoperative analgesic regimen, fewer required rescue antiemetic medication (p < 0.05, test of trend in proportions), and they had a lower incidence of vomiting (p < 0.05, test of trend in proportions), as well as a decrease in the number of times a rescue antiemetic was needed during the 24-hour postoperative period (linear trend, p = 0.013).

Conclusions: An intermittent intake of low-dose droperidol with morphine given via a PCA delivery system in two treatment groups gave evidence for a dose-response relation between the amount of droperidol added and the proportion of patients needing a rescue antiemetic. The same result applied to the proportion of patients having an emetic episode and the number of times a rescue antiemetic had to be administered. There was no evidence that the low dose of droperidol added to morphine delivered via a PCA device increased unwanted side effects.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources