Comparison of induction of spinal anesthesia in sitting position with legs parallel and crossed for cesarean section: A randomized controlled trial

N. Puthenveettil, Sajan Rahman, Arun Ramayyan Achary, Sobha S. Nair, Dilesh Kadapamannil, Jerry Paul
{"title":"Comparison of induction of spinal anesthesia in sitting position with legs parallel and crossed for cesarean section: A randomized controlled trial","authors":"N. Puthenveettil, Sajan Rahman, Arun Ramayyan Achary, Sobha S. Nair, Dilesh Kadapamannil, Jerry Paul","doi":"10.4103/joacp.joacp_11_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n The position of the patient during subarachnoid block has a role in its success. Landmarks of the spine can be easily identified in sitting position. Sitting position with legs parallel (LPSP) produces a reversal of lumbar lordosis. The crossed-leg sitting position (CLSP) is an alternative position. In this study, we compared the ease of performing subarachnoid blocks in these two positions. The objectives were to compare the attempts at subarachnoid placement, patient comfort, ease of landmark palpation, level of block, hypotension, and neonatal outcomes.\n \n \n \n This randomized trial was performed in 80 parturients posted for elective cesarean section. Parturients were assigned randomly to two groups. In group LPSP, the subarachnoid block was performed in sitting position with legs parallel and in group CLSP in the CLSP with knees and hips flexed.\n \n \n \n The percentage of parturients with a successful subarachnoid block in the first attempt was higher in the CLSP than in LPSP group (87.5% versus 55%). The remaining 12.5% parturients in the CLSP group had successful block in the second attempt. In the LPSP group, 32.5% required two attempts and 12.5% required more than two attempts. This difference was statistically significant (P-value of 0.003). The landmark was easily palpable in 92.5 versus 67.5% of parturients in CLSP and LPSP, respectively, with a P-value of 0.014.\n \n \n \n CLSP is better than a sitting position with legs parallel for reducing the number of attempts and improving the ease of performing the subarachnoid block.\n","PeriodicalId":508221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology","volume":"90 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/joacp.joacp_11_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The position of the patient during subarachnoid block has a role in its success. Landmarks of the spine can be easily identified in sitting position. Sitting position with legs parallel (LPSP) produces a reversal of lumbar lordosis. The crossed-leg sitting position (CLSP) is an alternative position. In this study, we compared the ease of performing subarachnoid blocks in these two positions. The objectives were to compare the attempts at subarachnoid placement, patient comfort, ease of landmark palpation, level of block, hypotension, and neonatal outcomes. This randomized trial was performed in 80 parturients posted for elective cesarean section. Parturients were assigned randomly to two groups. In group LPSP, the subarachnoid block was performed in sitting position with legs parallel and in group CLSP in the CLSP with knees and hips flexed. The percentage of parturients with a successful subarachnoid block in the first attempt was higher in the CLSP than in LPSP group (87.5% versus 55%). The remaining 12.5% parturients in the CLSP group had successful block in the second attempt. In the LPSP group, 32.5% required two attempts and 12.5% required more than two attempts. This difference was statistically significant (P-value of 0.003). The landmark was easily palpable in 92.5 versus 67.5% of parturients in CLSP and LPSP, respectively, with a P-value of 0.014. CLSP is better than a sitting position with legs parallel for reducing the number of attempts and improving the ease of performing the subarachnoid block.
剖腹产手术中双腿平行和交叉坐位脊髓麻醉诱导的比较:随机对照试验
蛛网膜下腔阻滞时患者的体位对其成功与否有一定影响。在坐位时可以很容易地识别脊柱的标志。双腿平行的坐姿(LPSP)可使腰椎前凸反转。交叉腿坐姿(CLSP)是另一种坐姿。在这项研究中,我们比较了在这两种体位下进行蛛网膜下腔阻滞的难易程度。目的是比较蛛网膜下腔置入的尝试、患者的舒适度、地标触诊的难易程度、阻滞水平、低血压和新生儿预后。 这项随机试验在 80 名预约剖宫产的产妇中进行。产妇被随机分配到两组。在 LPSP 组,蛛网膜下腔阻滞是在双腿平行的坐位下进行的,而在 CLSP 组则是在屈膝屈髋的 CLSP 位上进行的。 首次成功进行蛛网膜下腔阻滞的产妇比例,CLSP 组高于 LPSP 组(87.5% 对 55%)。CLSP组中其余12.5%的产妇在第二次尝试时成功阻滞。在 LPSP 组中,32.5% 的产妇需要尝试两次,12.5% 的产妇需要尝试两次以上。这一差异具有统计学意义(P 值为 0.003)。在 CLSP 和 LPSP 组中,分别有 92.5% 和 67.5% 的产妇可以轻松触及地标,P 值为 0.014。 在减少尝试次数和提高蛛网膜下腔阻滞易行性方面,CLSP 比双腿平行的坐姿更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信