Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 14 July 2004
- Published on: 25 June 2004
- Published on: 14 July 2004Author’s response to ‘futility of nalbuphine’Show More
Dear Editor
Aruni Sen’s evident distaste for nalbuphine seems to have precipitated a somewhat hasty and inaccurate reading of our paper [1].
Firstly, we did not claim that nalbuphine is an effective analgesic. We did, however, offer empirical evidence that it is effective for many patients –just under half of those treated had a pain score of three or less (‘mild’ pain) on arrival at hospital. Less tha...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 25 June 2004Futility of NalbuphineShow More
Dear Editor
Woollard and his colleagues' study on nalbuphine identifies the gap that can exist between research and clinical practice. I resent the claims in this paper that nalbuphine somehow is an effective analgesic.
Since 1996, I have been receiving patients in my hospital who have been given nalbuphine pre hospital with very little benefit and lot of problem. These patients get grossly inadequate anal...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.