ArticleAnesthesiology and pain medicine2017
Comparing Three Different Modified Sitting Positions for Ease of Spinal Needle Insertion in Patients Undergoing Spinal Anesthesia.
Article in Anesthesiology and pain medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 7 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.
Comparison of Three Different Sitting Positions for Performing Combined Spinal-Epidural Anesthesia
Comparison of Skin - Epidural and Intervertebral Distances Measured by Ultrasonography in Sitting and Rider Position
Preoperative Use of Peripheral Nerve Blocks in Elderly Patients With Hip Fractures: a Factorial Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of three sitting positions for combined spinal - epidural anesthesia: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)Trial
- Impact of being lateral and sitting position for spinal anesthesia administration on maternal hemodynamic variability and the timing of hypotension among cesarean section patients in a resource-constrained area: a prospective observational cohort study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Article
- 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
- 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 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe most important point for performing a neuroaxial block in a sitting position is reducing lumbar lordosis, resulting in easier access to interspinous space and dura mater. There are a few studies comparing 2 different sitting positions including a traditional sitting position (TSP) versus forward bending or hamstring stretch position (HSP) as well as TSP versus squatting position (SP) for reversing the lumbar lordosis and improving access to intervertebral space for neuroaxial block.
objectivesWe compared 3 different sitting positions including traditional sitting position vs. hamstring stretch position vs. squatting position and hypothesized that squatting position reverses the lumbar lordosis and reduces the number of spinal needle bone contacts more than TSP and HSP.
methodsA total of Thirty hundred and sixty ASA class I or II patients aged 18 to 60 years were scheduled for elective surgeries under spinal anesthesia were randomized into 3 groups. Our primary endpoint was the number of spinal needle-bone contacts and our secondary endpoint was ease of needle insertion or space identification.
resultsDemographic data were statistically different between the study groups. There was no statistical difference between the study groups regarding the number of needle bone contacts and the ease of finding intervertebral space (P = 0.63, P = 0.56, respectively).
conclusionsThere was no statistical difference between the TSP, HSP, and SP regarding the number of needle bone contacts and the ease of finding of intervertebral space. In this regard, each of these 3 positions 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.