ArticleAnesthesiology and pain medicine2016
Comparison of Successful Spinal Needle Placement Between Crossed-Leg Sitting Position and Traditional Sitting Position in Patients Undergoing Urology Surgery.
Article in Anesthesiology and pain medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Two Different Positions for Ultrasound-Guided Intervertebral Distance Evaluation.Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2023Article
- Comparison of ultrasonographic anatomy of spine in traditional sitting position versus crossed leg position in term pregnancy: A prospective, observational, crossover study.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2023Article
- Effect of reinsertion of the spinal needle stylet after spinal anaesthesia procedure on post dural puncture headache in women undergoing caesarean delivery.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2020Article
- The 'Cross-Legged Foetal Sitting Neuraxial Position': Is it Beneficial?-A Prospective Randomised Clinical Trial Via Ultrasonography.Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2020Article
- Comparison of cross-legged sitting position with the traditional sitting position for the ease of insertion of an epidural catheter in parturient for providing labour analgesia: A randomised control trial.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2020Article
- Comparing Three Different Modified Sitting Positions for Ease of Spinal Needle Insertion in Patients Undergoing Spinal Anesthesia.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2017Article
- Comparison of induction of spinal anesthesia in sitting position with legs parallel and crossed for cesarean section: A randomized controlled trial.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
- Comparison of neuraxial acoustic target window of the spine among rider sitting, cross leg, hamstring stretch, and classical sitting position: An observational study.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
- Rider sitting position widens lumbar intervertebral distance: a prospective observational study.Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe patient's position during spinal anesthesia administration plays a major role in the success of spinal needle insertion into the subarachnoid space. The traditional sitting position (TSP) is the standard position for spinal anesthesia administration, but the success rate for spinal anesthesia administration in the TSP is still quite low. The crossed-leg sitting position (CLSP) is one of the alternative positions for the administration of spinal anesthesia, which can increase the degree of lumbar flexion.
objectivesThis study aimed to compare successful spinal needle placement to patients in the CLSP and patients in the TSP prior to undergoing urology surgery.
methodsThis study was a non-blinded, randomized controlled trial in patients undergoing spinal anesthesia for urologic procedures from March-October, 2015 in the central national hospital Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo, Indonesia. After obtaining approval from the FMUI - RSCM (Faculty of Medicine Universitas Indonesia - Rumah Sakit Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo) Ethical Committee and informed consent from patients, 211 subjects were allocated into two groups: the CLSP group (n = 105) and the TSP group (n = 106). The proportion of successful spinal needle placement to the subarachnoid space, ease of landmark palpation, and the number of needle-bone contacts in both groups were then assessed and analyzed.
resultsThe rate of first-time successful spinal needle insertion was not significantly different between the CLSP and TSP groups (62.9% versus 55.7%, P > 0.05). Ease of landmark palpation in the CLSP group was not significantly different from that in the TSP group (86.7% versus 76.4%, P > 0.05). The number of needle-bone contacts in both groups were not significantly different (P > 0.05). The complication rates were similar in both groups.
conclusionsThe rate of successful spinal needle placement in the CLSP group was not significantly different from that in the TSP group in patients undergoing urology surgery. The CLSP can be used as an alternative sitting position for administration of spinal anesthesia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.