Home|Journals Follow on Twitter| Subscribe to List

Directory for Medical Articles
 

Open Access

23

PAFMJ. 2015; 65(5): 640-643


TO COMPARE EFFICACY & DISCOMFORT IN POSTERIOR NASAL PACKING WITH FOLEY'S CATHETERS VERSUS BIPP GAUZE PACKING IN CASES OF POSTERIOR EPISTAXIS

Muhammad Ahmed Khan, Sumera Akram, Attique Ahmed, Muhammad Ali Bhatti.

Abstract
Objective: To compare efficacy and discomfort in posterior nasal packing with Foley's catheters versus BIPP gauze packing in cases of posterior epistaxis.
Study Design: Randomized controlled trial.
Place and Duration of Study: Combined Military Hospital (CMH) Kharian from October 2011 to October 2013.
Material and Methods: A total of 206 patients of posterior epistaxis were included in the study through non-probability convenience sampling and randomly divided in two groups of 103 each. In group A patients were treated by posterior nasal packing with Foley's catheter and in group B patients were treated by posterior nasal packing with BIPP gauze and results in terms of control of epistaxis and discomfort during pack insertion, while the packs were in situ and pack removal, based on VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) were observed.
Results: Average age in group A was 52.64 years (SD=9.57) and in group B it was 50.27 years (SD ± 10.13). There were 71 (68.9%) males in group A while 67 (65%) males in group B. During posterior nasal pack insertion, the mean pain score in Group A was 6.21 (SD ± I.13) and in Group B was 7.43 (SD ± 1.19). The mean pain score with the pack in situ was 4.27 (SD ± 0.08) in Group A versus 4.76 (SD ± 0.09) Group B. Similarly pack removal was also more painful in group B than group A (6.14 ± 0.91 vs 6.89 ± 1.09) (p =0.000). In the group A, 31 (30.1%) patients had rebleeding after pack removal, out of which 9 (8.7%) had significant bleeding requiring repacking. In 22 (21.4%) cases there was mild bleeding which settled without repacking. In group B 22 (21.4%) patients had rebleeding after pack removal, out of which 5 (4.7%) had significant bleeding requiring repacking.
Conclusion: It is concluded that posterior nasal packing with BIPP gauze pack is effective for controlling posterior epistaxis but causes more discomfort to the patients as compared to Foley's catheter packing

Key words: BIPP gauze pack, Foley’s catheter, Posterior epistaxis.



Share this Article


Advertisement
Archives of Clinical and Experimental Surgery (ACES)

SUBMIT YOUR ARTICLE NOW


ScopeMed.com
ScopeMed Home
Follow ScopeMed on Twitter
BiblioCAM
Author Tools
eJPort Journal Hosting
About ScopeMed
License Information
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy
Contact Us

The articles in Scopemed are open access articles licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.
ScopeMed is a Database Service for Scientific Publications. Copyright © ScopeMed® Information Services.
Scopemed Buttons