The Clinic Trial On Patient-controlled Intravenous Analgesia Of Oxycodone Combined With Sacral Nerve Block In The Treatment Of Functional Anorectal Pain

objective:Explore the clinical application value of patient-controlled intravenous analgesia(PCIA)of oxycodone com bined with sacral nerve block in the treatment of functional anorectal pain.Methods:After Ethics Committee approval and informed consent.sixty-six patients with functional anorectal pain,forty-seven female,were studied.Patients were randomly,by random number table,divided into treatment group and control group.The patients of treatment group was accept the treatment of Patient-controlled Intravenous Analgesia of Oxycodone Combined with Sacral Nerve Block.At the same time,the control group was treated with biofeedback.The total treatment time for both groups was 2 weeks.Relevant indicators will be tested before the treatment begins and 1 week,2 weeks and 3 months after the treatment begins.VAS score is the main outcome measure,and The secondary out come measure are Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey(SF-36),Self-rating Depression Scale(SDS)and Self-rating Anxiety Scale(SAS).The experimental data are collected ?sorted out,and statistical analysis is completed by SPSS 17.0.Results:(1)The two groups' demographics(Age,gender,weight,height and the years of schooling)had no statistical significance(P values>0.05).(2)Before treatment,The disease course,The location of the pain,attack time,duration? diagnosis classification(Rome III),elements relevant to the disease,had no statistical significance(P values>0.05).(3)Main indicator VAS score:Before treatment,The VAS score of the two groups had no statistical signi ficance(P values>0.05).1 week after the treatment:The VAS score of the treatment group reduced significantly,compared with that test result before Patient-controlled Intravenous Analgesia of Oxycodone Com bined with Sacral Nerve Block,the difference is significant and has practical significance from a statistical point of view.(P<0.05).On the other hand,The VAS score of the control group decrease was not significant(P>0.05).2 week after the treatment: Compared with that before treatment,the VAS score of the treatment group and control group decreased significant,the difference has statistical significance(P<0.05).3 months after the treatment: Compared with that before treatment,the VAS score of the treat ment group and control group decreased significant,the difference has statistical significance(P<0.05).Further more,the VAS score of the treatment group decreased more,and the difference has statistical significance(P<0.05).(4)The secondary outcome measureSF-36:Treatment group:1 week after the treatment:The score of bodily pain,role emotional,vitality,mental health augmented,compared with that before experimental treatment,the difference is significant and has practical significance from a statistical point of view.(P<0.05).But in other ways,there was no statistical significance(P<0.05).2 week after the treatment:The result is just the same to last week.3 months after the treatment: The score of bodily pain,role emotional,vitality,mental health,social function augmented,compared with test result that before Patient-controlled Intravenous Analgesia of Oxycodone Combined with Sacral Nerve Block,the difference is significant and has practical significance from a statistical point of view.(P<0.05).But in other ways,there was no statistical significance(P<0.05).Control group:1 week after the treatment:The score had no obvious augment,and compared with the test out come that before biofeedback treatment,the difference had no statistical significance(P>0.05).2 week after the treatment:The score of bodily pain,role emotional,vitality,mental health augmented,compared with the test out come that before biofeedback treatment,the difference is significant and has practical significance from a statistical point of view.(P<0.05).But in other ways,there was no statistical significance(P<0.05).3 months after the treatment: The result is just the same to”2 week after the treatment”SDS:Treatment group : 1 week after the treatment:The test result reduced,compared with the test out come that before Patient-controlled Intravenous Analgesia of Oxycodone Combined with Sacral Nerve Block,the difference is significant and has practical significance from a statistical point of view.(P<0.05).And 2 week,3 months after the treatment:The test out come reduced,compared with the test result that before Patient-controlled Int ravenous Analgesia of Oxycodone Combined with Sacral Nerve Block,the difference has practical significance from a statistical point of view.(P<0.05)Control group:1 week after the treatment:The test outcome decreased not significant enough,compared with the test outcome that before biofeedback treatment,the difference is insignificant,so it has no statistical significance (P>0.05).2 week after the treat ment:The test out come cut downed,compared with the test result that before biofeedback treatment,the difference has practical significance from a statistical point of view.(P<0.05).3 months after the experimental treatment:The test outcome reduced,compared with the test result that before biofeedback treatment,the difference has practical significance from a statistical point of view.(P<0.05)SAS:Treatment group:1 week after the treatment:The test outcome reduced distinctly,compared with the test outcome that before testing therapy,the difference be deemed to has it's statistical significance(P<0.05).And 2 week,3 months after the treatment:The test score decline obviously,contrasted with the test outcome that before Patient-controlled Intravenous Analgesia of Oxycodone Combined with Sacral Nerve Block,the difference has practical significance from a statistical point of view.(P<0.05).Control group:1 week after the treatment:The test outcome decreased not significant enough,compared with the test outcome that before biofeedback treatment,the difference is insignificant,so it has no statistical significance (P>0.05).2 week after the treatment:The score declined,compared with the score that before accepted pre-designed interventions,the difference,by statistical analysis,has statistical significance(P<0.05).3 months after the treatment:The evaluation value declined by a large margin,compared with the test result that before biofeedback treatment,the difference,without question,has statistical significance(P<0.05).ConlusionIn this trial,the clinical practice was used to compare the effect of the two therapeutic schedules in treating FAP,and after all of the work,the following conclusions can be drawn:(1)Compared to control group,the VAS score of treat ment group reduce faster.(2)Compared to control group,treatment group has a better pain control in long term(3 months).(3)Compared to control group,the SF-36 score of treatment group rise faster,and treatment group has absolute advantage in improving social function.(4)Compared to control group,the SDS and SAS score of treatm ent group reduce faster,that means it can relieve depression and anxiety in patients faster.