ArticleCureus2024
Anesthesia Preferences and Outcomes in Saudi Arabian Healthcare: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnesthesia choice is critical in ensuring optimal surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction. We aimed to investigate anesthesia preferences, trends, and outcomes in elective surgeries within Saudi Arabian healthcare settings.
methodsA cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted among anesthesia residents and attending anesthesiologists across Saudi Arabia. Participants provided demographic information and responded to questions regarding anesthesia preferences, trends, and outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data, and logistic regression analysis was employed to identify factors associated with anesthesia preference.
resultsThe survey was completed by 572 healthcare professionals in Saudi Arabia. Among participants, 51.7% (n=296) preferred general anesthesia, while 48.3% (n=276) favored regional anesthesia for elective surgeries. Factors influencing anesthesia choice included patient preference, surgical complexity, and resource availability. Over half of the respondents reported an increase in regional anesthesia preference over the past five years, although some perceived inadequate training in this area. Common barriers to regional anesthesia adoption included equipment availability, patient reluctance, and limited training opportunities. Postoperative recovery was perceived as quicker with regional anesthesia by 52.3% (n=299) of participants, with postoperative nausea and vomiting being the most common complication associated with general anesthesia. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that participants above 50 years had lower odds of preferring regional anesthesia, while those perceiving training adequacy in regional anesthesia as adequate had higher odds of preferring it (OR=0.64, 95% CI: 0.41-0.98, p=0.041; OR=1.58, 95% CI: 1.21-2.05, p=0.001, respectively).
conclusionThis study provides insights into anesthesia practice patterns in Saudi Arabian healthcare settings. Individualized anesthesia care, ongoing training in regional anesthesia, and evidence-based decision-making are essential to optimize perioperative outcomes and patient satisfaction.
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.