Anaesthesia
-
Review
Decision analysis in anaesthesia: a tool for developing and analysing clinical management plans.
Traditional medical decision making is unstructured and incorporates evidence haphazardly. I present a more structured approach based on decision analysis, a model that considers all relevant options and outcomes informed by evidence where appropriate. This method is useful both for planning clinical management and for analysing decisions already taken.
-
Comparative Study
Comparison of the Berman Intubating Airway and the Williams Airway Intubator for fibreoptic orotracheal intubation in anaesthetised patients.
Sixty patients with no clinical indicators of a difficult airway were selected to undergo a fibreoptic assessment after induction of general anaesthesia using both the Berman Intubating Airway and the Williams Airway Intubator. The bronchoscopic view and ease of railroading a tracheal tube during fibreoptic orotracheal intubation were studied. ⋯ The estimated odds ratio of obtaining an obstructed path was 3.06 times higher for the Berman than the Williams Airway. However, if the glottis could be reached with the bronchoscope, there was no significant difference in the degree of ease of intubation between the two airways.
-
This study examines the incidence and site of tracheal tube impingement during nasotracheal fibreoptic intubation, and the efficacy of anticlockwise tube rotation to overcome the problem. Forty-three patients underwent fibreoptic-assisted nasotracheal intubation using a preformed nasal tube, and a second fibrescope was used to observe any obstruction to passage of the tracheal tube. ⋯ Rotation resulted in successful intubation in all 10 cases, but proximal rotation did not always result in an equal degree of rotation at the tube tip. We conclude that the site of impingement for nasotracheal intubation with preformed nasal tubes is located at the posterior structures of the laryngeal inlet and that anticlockwise rotation is a simple and effective solution.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Does the efficacy of supplemental oxygen for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting depend on the measured outcome, observational period or site of surgery?
High intra-operative oxygen concentration reportedly reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), but recent data are conflicting. Therefore, we tested whether the effectiveness of supplemental oxygen depends on the endpoint (nausea vs. vomiting), observation interval (early vs. late) or surgical field (abdominal vs. non-abdominal). We randomly assigned 560 adult patients undergoing various elective procedures with a PONV risk of at least 40% to intra-operative 80% (supplemental) or 30% oxygen (control). ⋯ Incidences of nausea were similar in the groups during early (12% (supplemental) vs. 10% (control), p = 0.43) and late intervals, 26%vs. 20%, p = 0.09, as were the incidences of vomiting (early: 2%vs. 3%, p = 0.40; late: 8%vs. 9%, p = 0.75). Supplemental oxygen was no more effective at reducing PONV in abdominal (40%vs. 31%, p = 0.37) than in non-abdominal surgery (25%vs. 21%, p = 0.368). Thus, supplemental oxygen was unable to reduce PONV independent of the endpoint, observational period or site of surgery.