Anaesthesia
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Patient controlled analgesia for labour: a comparison of remifentanil with pethidine.
We compared the analgesic efficacy and safety of remifentanil and pethidine via patient controlled analgesia for women in established uncomplicated labour. Women received either remifentanil 40 microg with a 2-min lockout (n = 20) or pethidine 15 mg with a 10-min lockout (n = 19). ⋯ Maternal arterial oxygen saturation was similar in both groups. Neurologic and Adaptive Capacity Scores at 30 min were higher for remifentanil than for pethidine (median (interquartile range [range]) 36 (34.5-37 [32-39]) vs 34 (33-35 [30-35]), respectively; p = 0.003).
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Randomised controlled cross-over comparison of continuous positive airway pressure through the Hamilton Galileo ventilator with a Dräger CF 800 device.
In this controlled, randomised cross-over trial on 26 intensive care patients, we compared the effects on haemodynamic and respiratory profiles of continuous positive airway pressure delivered through the Hamilton Galileo ventilator or a Drager CF 800 device. We also compared the nursing time saved using the two approaches when weaning patients from mechanical ventilation. ⋯ However, there was a 10-fold reduction in nursing time using the Galileo ventilator compared with the Drager generator. We conclude that continuous positive airway pressure delivered through the Galileo ventilator is as efficient as a Drager device but consumes less nursing time.
-
Previous communication research in general medical practice has shown that effective communication enhances patient compliance, satisfaction and medical outcome. It is expected that communication is equally important in anaesthesia, since patients often suffer from anxiety and lack of knowledge about anaesthetic procedures. However, little is known about the nature of communication during routine anaesthetic visits. ⋯ The use of facilitators, open questions and emotional statements by the anaesthetist correlated with high patient involvement. The amount of patient participation in anaesthetic decisions was assessed with the Observing Patient Involvement Scale (OPTION). Compared with general practitioners, anaesthetists offered more opportunities to discuss treatment options (mean (SD) OPTION score 26.8 (16.8) vs. 16.8 (7.7)).