Critical Care and Pain
Critical Care and Pain
Nalini K.B.,MS Ramaiah Medical College and Hospital |
Cherian A.,Critical Care and Pain |
Balachander H.,Critical Care and Pain
Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research | Year: 2014
Background: Puerperal sterilization requires a rapid recovery of the mother so that she can take care of her child. Propofol with fentanyl (PF) is an option, but is associated with intraoperative hypotension, respiratory depression and an unsatisfactory postoperative recovery profile. Propofol with ketamine (PK) appears to be an alternative in terms of haemodynamic stability and analgesia. Materials and Methods: This randomized clinical trial involved 60 patients who were scheduled to undergo puerperal sterilization, who belonged to American society of anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status 1. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either ketamine - propofol infusion in a concentration of 8mg/ml each (group PK) or fentanyl 2μg/kg intravenously, followed by an infusion of propofol in a concentration of 8mg/ml (group PF). In both the groups, the infusion was started at 300ml/hr till patient lost consciousness. Subsequently, the rate was set at 1.5ml/kg/hr for group PF and at 0.75ml/kg/hr for group PK. After the initial 10 minutes, the infusion rate was reduced to 1ml/kg/hr for group PF and to 0.5ml/kg/hr for group PK. Blood pressure and saturation were the primary outcomes which were measured.Results: Patients from group PF recorded a significant drop in the systolic blood pressure from the 5th minute, in diastolic pressure from the 10th minute and transient oxygen desaturation, as compared to group PK. Patients in group PK had adequate surgical conditions and better recovery profiles in terms of pain and sedation.Conclusion: The combination of ketamine and propofol is a safe and possibly superior alternative to propofol - fentanyl combination in patients who undergo puerperal sterilization, in terms of haemodynamic stability and respiratory depression.
Bakshi S.G.,Critical Care and Pain |
Jain P.N.,Critical Care and Pain |
Kannan S.,Actrec Tata Memorial Center
Indian Journal of Anaesthesia | Year: 2014
Background and Aim: Under-treatment of pain is a global phenomenon and the basic knowledge of pain amongst health care providers continues to be deficient. The aim of this study was to determine the basic prevalent knowledge of pain among Indian anaesthesiologists and the impact of a pain educational programme on their existing knowledge. Methods: A nine lectures pain continuing medical education (CME) program was conducted for 114 young anaesthesiologists. All delegates were given 21-item questionnaire in a pre and post-test design. The 69 paired responses were compared for individual questions using McNemar test and the overall improvement in knowledge was analysed using paired t-test. Results: The pre-test score for correct answers was 61.9%. The post-test score was 69.8% and this improvement was found to be statistically significant (P < 0.001). A significant improvement in perception was detected that 'opioids usage was less likely to cause addiction' (correct responses increased from 4.2 to 77.4%, P = 0.001). Conclusion: The questionnaire study found that the current basic knowledge about pain amongst young anaesthesiologists is deficient. The physician's major concerns were opioid addiction and respiratory depression with opioid usage. The results of pre and post-test questionnaire survey have shown that pain education can help in improving knowledge of pain management.
Telang R.,Critical Care and Pain |
Patil V.,Critical Care and Pain |
Ranganathan P.,Critical Care and Pain |
Kelkar R.,Tata Memorial Hospital
Journal of Postgraduate Medicine | Year: 2010
Background : The laryngoscope has been identified as a potential source of cross-infection, because of blood and bacterial contamination. In India, there are no guidelines for cleaning and disinfection of anesthesia-related equipment. Practices for decontamination of laryngoscopes vary widely and in most healthcare institutes, laryngoscope blades are re-used after cleaning with tap-water. Materials and Methods: We prospectively compared two techniques for decontamination of laryngoscope blades - a) washing with tap-water and b) washing with tap-water followed by disinfection by immersing in 5% v/v (volume/volume, 1:20 dilution) aldehyde-free biguanide agent for 10 min. We calculated the cost-effectiveness of using 5% v/v aldehyde-free biguanide agent for disinfection of laryngoscopes. We also conducted a survey to assess the decontamination practices in other Indian hospitals. Results : Overall bacterial growth was 58% (29 out of 50 blades) after tap-water cleaning (of which 60% were pathogenic organisms) versus 3.4% (one out of 29 blades) after tap-water cleaning followed by immersion in disinfectant (all of which were commensals). The cost of disinfection with biguanide was Indian Rupees 1.13 (20 US cents) per laryngoscope. Most hospitals in India do not have guidelines regarding laryngoscope decontamination between uses, and cleaning with tap water is a commonly used method. Conclusion : Cleaning of laryngoscope blades with tap-water is a commonly used but inadequate method for decontamination. Washing with tap-water followed by disinfection with 5% v/v aldehyde-free biguanide for at least 10 min is an effective and inexpensive alternative. National guidelines for the decontamination of anesthesia equipment are necessary.