Nebulized versus subcutaneous morphine for patients with cancer dyspnea: A preliminary study

Eduardo Bruera, Raul Sala, Odette Spruyt, J. Lynn Palmer, Tao Zhang, Jie Willey

    Research output: Contribution to journalShort surveypeer-review

    77 Scopus citations

    Abstract

    This study compared the effects of nebulized versus subcutaneous morphine on the intensity of dyspnea in cancer patients. Patients with a resting dyspnea intensity ≥3 on a 0-10 scale (0 = no dyspnea, 10 = worst possible dyspnea) who received regular oral or parenteral opioids were included. On day 1, patients received either subcutaneous (SC) morphine plus nebulized placebo or nebulized morphine plus SC placebo. On day 2, a crossover was made. Dyspnea intensity, side effects, and blinded preference of treatment were assessed. Eleven patients completed the study. Dyspnea decreased from a median of 5 (range, 3-8) to 3 (range, 0-7) after SC morphine (P = 0.025) and from 4 (range, 3-9) to 2 (range, 0-9) after nebulized morphine (P = 0.007). There was no significant difference in dyspnea intensity between nebulized and subcutaneous morphine at 60 minutes. Unfortunately, due to limited sample size, there was insufficient power to rule out a significant difference between both routes of administration. Nebulized morphine offered dyspnea relief similar to that of SC morphine. Larger randomized controlled trials in patients with both continuous dyspnea and earlier stages of dyspnea are justified.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)613-618
    Number of pages6
    JournalJournal of pain and symptom management
    Volume29
    Issue number6
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Jun 2005

    Keywords

    • Dyspnea
    • Nebulization
    • Opioids
    • Subcutaneous Injection

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • General Nursing
    • Clinical Neurology
    • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Nebulized versus subcutaneous morphine for patients with cancer dyspnea: A preliminary study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this