Cargando…

Straight versus flex back: Does it matter in spinal anaesthesia?

PURPOSE: It is sometimes difficult for our patients to acquire recommended flexion of their back to perform subarachnoid block upon them. The aim of this study was to find out the degree of procedural success and patient preference when subarachnoid blocks were performed on patients with suboptimal...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Biswas, Binay Kumar, Agarwal, Bikash, Bhattarai, Balakrishna, Dey, Samarjit, Bhattacharyya, Prithwish
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3425286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22923825
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.98772
_version_ 1782241356818677760
author Biswas, Binay Kumar
Agarwal, Bikash
Bhattarai, Balakrishna
Dey, Samarjit
Bhattacharyya, Prithwish
author_facet Biswas, Binay Kumar
Agarwal, Bikash
Bhattarai, Balakrishna
Dey, Samarjit
Bhattacharyya, Prithwish
author_sort Biswas, Binay Kumar
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: It is sometimes difficult for our patients to acquire recommended flexion of their back to perform subarachnoid block upon them. The aim of this study was to find out the degree of procedural success and patient preference when subarachnoid blocks were performed on patients with suboptimal flexion of the back. METHODS: Subarachnoid blocks were performed on 160 adult patients from both sexes without any spinal deformity. Procedures were performed with patients in the lateral or seated position with the back either straight or flexed. This approach divided the study population into 4 equal groups: Lateral with back straight (LS) or flexed (LF) and seated with back straight (SS) or flexed (SF). The primary endpoint was correct needle placement. Numbers of attempts, needle redirections and patients’ preferred posture were determined to compare the outcome in different groups. RESULTS: For both positions, the overall success rates were 95% and 100% in patients who had straight or flexed back, respectively (P=0.81). In the lateral position, significantly more patients of the LF group (40) than those of the LS group (32) had successful placement of spinal needle at first attempt (P=0.03). Altogether, 34 and 21 patients in the SS and SF groups, respectively, required cephalad redirections of the needle (P=0.003). Most patients preferred the straight back position (69.7–88%). CONCLUSION: With a higher preference by patients for the straight back posture, the overall success rate of correct spinal needle placement was comparable among the groups who had their back placed in a straight or in a flexed posture for subarachnoid block.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3425286
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34252862012-08-24 Straight versus flex back: Does it matter in spinal anaesthesia? Biswas, Binay Kumar Agarwal, Bikash Bhattarai, Balakrishna Dey, Samarjit Bhattacharyya, Prithwish Indian J Anaesth Clinical Investigation PURPOSE: It is sometimes difficult for our patients to acquire recommended flexion of their back to perform subarachnoid block upon them. The aim of this study was to find out the degree of procedural success and patient preference when subarachnoid blocks were performed on patients with suboptimal flexion of the back. METHODS: Subarachnoid blocks were performed on 160 adult patients from both sexes without any spinal deformity. Procedures were performed with patients in the lateral or seated position with the back either straight or flexed. This approach divided the study population into 4 equal groups: Lateral with back straight (LS) or flexed (LF) and seated with back straight (SS) or flexed (SF). The primary endpoint was correct needle placement. Numbers of attempts, needle redirections and patients’ preferred posture were determined to compare the outcome in different groups. RESULTS: For both positions, the overall success rates were 95% and 100% in patients who had straight or flexed back, respectively (P=0.81). In the lateral position, significantly more patients of the LF group (40) than those of the LS group (32) had successful placement of spinal needle at first attempt (P=0.03). Altogether, 34 and 21 patients in the SS and SF groups, respectively, required cephalad redirections of the needle (P=0.003). Most patients preferred the straight back position (69.7–88%). CONCLUSION: With a higher preference by patients for the straight back posture, the overall success rate of correct spinal needle placement was comparable among the groups who had their back placed in a straight or in a flexed posture for subarachnoid block. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2012 /pmc/articles/PMC3425286/ /pubmed/22923825 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.98772 Text en Copyright: © Indian Journal of Anaesthesia http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Investigation
Biswas, Binay Kumar
Agarwal, Bikash
Bhattarai, Balakrishna
Dey, Samarjit
Bhattacharyya, Prithwish
Straight versus flex back: Does it matter in spinal anaesthesia?
title Straight versus flex back: Does it matter in spinal anaesthesia?
title_full Straight versus flex back: Does it matter in spinal anaesthesia?
title_fullStr Straight versus flex back: Does it matter in spinal anaesthesia?
title_full_unstemmed Straight versus flex back: Does it matter in spinal anaesthesia?
title_short Straight versus flex back: Does it matter in spinal anaesthesia?
title_sort straight versus flex back: does it matter in spinal anaesthesia?
topic Clinical Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3425286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22923825
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.98772
work_keys_str_mv AT biswasbinaykumar straightversusflexbackdoesitmatterinspinalanaesthesia
AT agarwalbikash straightversusflexbackdoesitmatterinspinalanaesthesia
AT bhattaraibalakrishna straightversusflexbackdoesitmatterinspinalanaesthesia
AT deysamarjit straightversusflexbackdoesitmatterinspinalanaesthesia
AT bhattacharyyaprithwish straightversusflexbackdoesitmatterinspinalanaesthesia