Joo 2015.
Study characteristics | ||
Methods |
Study design: randomized controlled trial Study grouping: 3 groups, monoprophylaxis and combination prophylaxis |
|
Participants |
Baseline characteristics Dexamethasone
Haloperidol 1 mg + dexamethasone
Haloperidol 2 mg + dexamethasone
Included criteria: ASA I or II, female, 20 to 65 years of age, scheduled for gynaecologic laparoscopic surgery and intravenous (IV) PCA for postoperative pain control. Based on Apfel’s simplified risk score, patients in this study had the following 3 standard PONV risk factors: female, non‐smoker, and use of opioid analgesics after surgery Excluded criteria: known allergy or intolerance to study drug; history of cardiac arrhythmia; psychiatric illness; long‐term treatment with a dopamine antagonist; use of opioids or steroids within 1 week of surgery; use of antiemetic in the 24 hours before the study; inability to use the PCA device; gastrointestinal, renal, or hepatic disease; insulin‐dependent diabetes or obesity, body mass index > 35 kg/m² Pretreatment: baseline characteristics (age, weight, ASA): no. Potential effect modifiers (gender, duration of anaesthesia, non‐smoker, history of PONV/motion sickness, perioperative opioids): no |
|
Interventions |
Intervention characteristics Dexamethasone
Haloperidol 1 mg + dexamethasone
Haloperidol 2 mg + dexamethasone
|
|
Outcomes |
Vomiting (0 to 2 hours)
Vomiting (2 to 24 hours)
PONV (0 to 24 hours)
Arrhythmia (PACU)
Extrapyramidal symptoms (0 to 24 hours)
|
|
Identification |
Sponsorship source: departmental resources only. No sponsor involvement Country: Korea Setting: inpatient, single‐centre Author's name: Young Eun Moon Institution: Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul St.Mary´s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea Email: anemoon@naver.com Address: 222 Banpo‐daero, Seocho‐gu, Seoul 137‐701, Republic of Korea Language: English Duration of study: NA Trial registry number: NCT01639599 Study's primary outcome: incidence of PONV in 24 hours |
|
Notes | None | |
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "computer‐generated codes" |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Quote: "using computer‐generated codes placed in sequentially numbered, opaque envelopes, the enrolled patients were assigned randomly to one of three groups" Judgement comment: not stated; "sealed" envelopes (SNOSE) |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Quote: "a nurse anesthetist not involved in the treatment opened the envelopes and prepared the study drugs in identical syringes with a total volume of 2 mL (diluted with saline). The patients and attending anesthesiologists were blinded to the group assignments" |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Quote: "staff who remained blind to the group assignment made the postoperative evaluations" |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Quote: "of the 150 patients registered for the study, one was excluded due to an intra‐operative conversion to laparotomy (Fig. 1). The remaining 149 patients, consisting of 50, 49, and 50 patients in groups H0, H1, and H2, respectively, completed the study" |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Judgement comment: NCT01639599 (retrospective registration) |
Other bias | Low risk | Judgement comment: baseline characteristics (age, weight, ASA): no. Potential effect modifiers (gender, duration of anaesthesia, non‐smoker, history of PONV/motion sickness, perioperative opioids): no |