FRCPCPurpose: To compare both the efficacy and cost of nalbuphine and diphenhydramine in the treatment of intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus following Caesarean section. Methods: Eighty patients, undergoing elective Caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia, were randomized, in a prospective, double-blind trial, to receive either nalbuphine (Group NAL) or diphenhydramine (Group DIP) for the treatment of SAB morphine-induced pruritus. All patients received an intrathecal injection of 1 0-12 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.75% and 200 ~tg preservative free morphine. Postoperative pruritus was assessed, using a visual analogue scale (VAS), for 24 hr. Pruritus treatment was administered upon patient request and by a nurse blinded to the treatment given. Patients who failed to respond to three doses of the study drug were deemed treatment failures. Patient satisfaction was assessed with a questionnaire given 24 to 48 hr after surgery. Direct drug costs were calculated based on the pharmacy provision costs as of April 1996. Results: Eighty patients were enrolled and 45 requested treatment for pruritus. Patients treated with NAL (n = 24) were more likely to achieve a VAS score of zero with treatment (83% vs 43%, P < 0.01), had a higher AVAS following treatment (4 + 2 vs 2 ___ 2, P < 0.003), and experienced fewer treatment failures (4% vs 29%, P < 0.04), than those treated with DIP (n = 21 ). Group NAL patients were also more likely to rate their pruritus treatment as being good to excellent (96% vs 57%, P < 0.004). Direct drug costs were higher for NAL than for DIP ($6.4 +_ 3. I vs $1.7 _+ 0.7, respectively, P < 0.0001). Conclusion: Nalbuphine is more effective than diphenhydramine in relieving pruritus caused by intrathecal morphine and the cost differences are small.Objectif : Comparer I'efficacit~ et le cofit de la nalbuphine avec ceux de la diphenhydramine administr6e apr& la c&arienne comme traitement du prurit provoqu~ par la morphine sous-arachndfdienne. M&hodes : Dans cette 6tude prospective en double aveugle, 80 parturientes op6r6es pour une c&arienne non urgente sous rachianesth&ie ont ~t~ r6parties au hasard pour recevoir comme traitement du prurit provoqu6 par la morphine soit de la nalbuphine (groupe NAL), soit de la diphenhydramine (groupe DIP). Toutes les patientes ont re~u une injection sous-arachndidienne de 10-12 mg de bupivac~'ne 0,75% hyperbare avec 200/~g de morphine sans pr&ervatif. Une &helle visuelle analogique (EVA) a servi ~ 6valuer I'intensit~ du prurit postop&atoire pendant 24 h. Le traitement antiprurigineux a &6 administr6 ~ la demande de la patiente et par une inflrmi&e ignorant la nature du traitement. On consid&ait le traitement comme un &hec en I'absence de r6ponse ~trois doses de la drogue &udi&. La satisfaction de la patiente &ait ~valu& avec un questionnaire administr~ 24 ~ 48 h apr& la chirurgie. Les coots d'approvisionnement de la pharmacie en avril 1996 repr~sentaient les coots directs des produits utilis&. R~sttltats : Quarante-cinq des 80 participantes ~ I'&ude ont demand~ un t...