...
首页> 外文期刊>British journal of sports medicine >A comparison of two treatment protocols in the management of exercise-associated postural hypotension: a randomised clinical trial.
【24h】

A comparison of two treatment protocols in the management of exercise-associated postural hypotension: a randomised clinical trial.

机译:运动相关姿势性低血压管理中两种治疗方案的比较:一项随机临床试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To investigate which of two commonly used treatment protocols for exercise-associated postural hypotension (EAPH) resulted in earlier discharge from the medical facility. METHODS: This randomised clinical field trial was undertaken at two Ironman Triathlon competitions and one ultra-distance footrace. All collapsed athletes admitted to the medical facilities were considered for the trial. Following clinical assessment and special investigations to confirm the diagnosis of EAPH, 28 athletes were randomly assigned to an oral fluid and Trendelenburg position (OT=14) or an intravenous fluid (IV=14) treatment group. Following admission fluid intake was recorded, and all athletes were assessed clinically (blood pressure, heart rate, level of consciousness) every 15 min until discharge criteria were met. The main measure of outcome was the time to discharge (min). RESULTS: On admission, subjects in the OT and IV groups were similar with respect to age, systolic blood pressure, heart rate and serum sodium concentration. There were no significant differences in heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure between groups and over time until discharge. The fluid intake during the treatment period was significantly greater in the IV group (IV 1045 +/- 185 ml, OT 204 +/- 149 ml; p<0.001). The average time to discharge for the OT group (58 +/- 23 min) was similar to that of the IV group (52.5 +/- 18 min; p=0.47). CONCLUSION: Endurance athletes with EAPH can be treated effectively using the Trendelenburg position and oral fluids and the administration of intravenous fluids does not reduce the time to discharge. The findings of this study support the hypothesis that EAPH is a result of venous pooling due to peripheral vasodilatation, rather than dehydration.
机译:目的:研究运动相关姿势性低血压(EAPH)的两种常用治疗方案中的哪一种导致较早出院。方法:这项随机临床现场试验是在两项铁人三项铁人三项比赛和一项超长距离比赛中进行的。所有进入医疗机构的倒塌运动员都被考虑参加审判。经过临床评估和专项调查以确认EAPH的诊断,将28名运动员随机分为口服液和特伦德伦伯卧位(OT = 14)或静脉输液(IV = 14)治疗组。入院后记录液体摄入量,并每15分钟对所有运动员进行临床评估(血压,心率,意识水平),直到达到出院标准为止。结果的主要指标是出院时间(分钟)。结果:入院时,OT组和IV组的受试者在年龄,收缩压,心率和血清钠浓度方面相似。各组之间以及直至出院的时间之间,心率,收缩压和舒张压均无显着差异。 IV组在治疗期间的液体摄入量显着增加(IV 1045 +/- 185 ml,OT 204 +/- 149 ml; p <0.001)。 OT组的平均放电时间(58 +/- 23分钟)与IV组的平均放电时间(52.5 +/- 18分钟; p = 0.47)相似。结论:使用特伦德伦伯卧位和口服液可以有效治疗EAPH耐力运动员,静脉注射液不能减少出院时间。这项研究的发现支持以下假设:EAPH是外周血管扩张而非脱水引起的静脉合并的结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号