Trial reportThe Pan African medical journal2017
Comparison of ease of induction of spinal anaesthesia in sitting with legs parallel on the table versus traditional sitting position.
Trial report in The Pan African medical journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06209372 (The Efficiency of Preoperative Pericapsular Nerve Group Block Applied With Ultrasound in Patients With Hip Fracture and Its Effect on the Success of Spinal Anesthesia), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 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.
The Efficiency of Preoperative Pericapsular Nerve Group Block Applied With Ultrasound in Patients With Hip Fracture and Its Effect on the Success of Spinal Anesthesia (PENG)
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of Preoperative Pericapsular Nerve Group Block in Patients with Hip Fracture and its Effect on the Success of Spinal Anaesthesia: A Retrospective Study.Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2024Article
- Adverse events during anaesthesia at an Ethiopian referral hospital: a prospective observational study.The Pan African medical journal · 2021Observational
- 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
- Metformin protects against sevoflurane-induced neuronal apoptosis through the S1P1 and ERK signaling pathways.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2019Article
- Tailored Surgery in Inguinal Hernia Repair. The Role of Subarachnoid Anesthesia: A Retrospective Study.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2019Article
- Rider sitting position widens lumbar intervertebral distance: a prospective observational study.Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)Observational
- 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
- Optimal patient positioning for spinal anesthesia using a visual aid in cesarean section patients: A randomized control trial.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIt is sometimes difficult for some patients to optimally flex their hips and knees making traditional position for induction of spinal anaesthesia difficult to achieve. The ease of induction of spinal anaesthesia was compared with patients in sitting position with legs remaining on the table (new sitting method) versus legs placed on the side stool (traditional sitting method).
methodsOne hundred eligible elderly patients, aged between 65 and 80 years, scheduled for open prostactectomy, were prospectively randomized to 2 groups, LS and LT. Patients in (LS group) had their spinal anaesthesia induced in sitting position with their legs placed on the stool while patients in (LT group) had their spinal anaesthesia induced in sitting position with their legs remaning on the operating table. The primary endpoint was correct needle placement. Numbers of attempts, needle redirections and patients' comfort were determined to compare outcome in the two groups.
resultsMore patients in LS group (78%) than those in the LT group (64%) had successful placement of spinal needle at first attempt (P = 0.12, RR = 1.6, 95% CI = 0.863-3.102). Needle redirections were similar at first attempt (52% versus 40%; P = 0.22). The groups were equivalent with respect to 100% overall success rate (P = 1.000). It took longer time to induce spinal anaesthesia in patients in LS group (240 vs 125s, p < 0.001). Patients in LT were more comfotable.
conclusionThe 100% overall success rate was comparable. However, patients were generally more comfortable with their legs placed on the table.
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.