RESUMO
Background: Controlling the process of childbirth has disabled the parturient to embrace the most spontaneous position of delivery but constricting her to assume a recumbent position. Objective of this study was to study if alternating comfortable maternal positioning i.e., recumbent and alternative position have any influence in the process of labor, type of delivery, neonatal well-being.Methods: Study conducted an observation study on term pregnant women. Study inclusion criteria included all term pregnant women. Exclusion criteria included multiple pregnancies, preterm patient, severe pre-eclampsia, and eclampsia, preterm premature rupture of membranes, sever intrauterine growth restricted fetus. The measured date were maternal general characteristics, duration of labor process, type of delivery and neonatal outcome. Patients were divided into two groups. Group A - if they spent more than 50% in a recumbent position and Group B - any other alternating position.Results: A total 250 women were equally included in this study. The demographic characteristics were matched in both groups and found no significant difference. In the process of labor, Group B had a difference of 1 hours as compared to Group A and the rate of cervical dilation was also faster in Group B. Both of these variables were found to be statistically significant. However, there were no significant difference in the terms of type of delivery and neonatal outcome.Conclusions: The ancient practice of recumbent position during labor is to be discarded as alternating maternal position during the process of labor may a positive influence on the total duration labor. However even though it may or may not have an influence on the other outcome such as route of delivery and neonatal outcome, it is best to encourage women to move and deliver in the most comfortable position.
RESUMO
JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: A anestesia regional intravenosa (ARIV) para cirurgias de membros superiores com a tradicional alta dose de lidocaína pode levar a efeitos colaterais potencialmente letais. A fim de evitar esses efeitos, muitas técnicas modificadas de ARIV foram experimentadas com o uso de uma dose baixa de lidocaína, relaxante muscular e opioide. MÉTODOS: O presente estudo foi feito com 60 pacientes não medicados previamente, com classificação ASA 1-2, para comparar as características sensoriais e motoras, os parâmetros cardiorrespiratórios e os efeitos colaterais durante o período intraoperatório e de deflação pós-torniquete entre os pacientes que receberam 40 mL de lidocaína a 0,5% (n = 30) e aqueles que receberam uma combinação de 40 mL de lidocaína a 0,25% com 0,05 mg de fentanil e 0,5 mg de vecurônio (n = 30) em ARIV para cirurgias ortopédicas de membros superiores. Os resultados foram analisados com o uso do teste t de Student pareado para identificar a significância estatística. RESULTADO: A diferença entre os dois grupos em relação ao tempo médio de início e completo bloqueio sensitivo e motor foi estatisticamente significante. Porém, houve completo bloqueio sensitivo e motor em ambos os grupos 15 minutos após a injeção da solução anestésica. CONCLUSÃO: Embora a pequena demora observada no início e na obtenção completa dos bloqueios sensitivo e motor possa, teoricamente, atrasar o início da cirurgia em 10-15 minutos, clinicamente esse tempo seria gasto na preparação do campo cirúrgico. Portanto, essa combinação pode ser usada com segurança e eficácia em anestesia regional intravenosa para cirurgias ortopédicas de membros superiores com menor possibilidade de toxicidade anestésica local.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Intravenous regional anesthesia (IVRA) for upper limb surgeries with traditional high dose of lidocaine can lead to life threatening side effects. In order to avoid these potential life threatening side effects, many modified techniques of IVRA have been attempted by using a low dose of lidocaine, muscle relaxant and opioid. METHOD: The present study is carried out in sixty unpremedicated ASA Class 1 and 2 patients to compare the sensory and motor characteristics, cardio-respiratory parameters and side-effects during intra-operative and post-tourniquet deflation period between the patients who received 40 mL of 0.5% lidocaine alone (n = 30) and those who received a combination of 40 mL of 0.25% lidocaine with 0.05 mg fentanyl and 0.5 mg vecuronium (n = 30) in IVRA for upper limb orthopedic surgeries. The results were analyzed for statistical significance using a paired student t test. RESULTS: The difference between the two groups regarding the mean time of onset and complete sensory and motor block was statistically significant. But 15 minutes after the injection of anesthetic solution, there was complete sensory and motor block in both groups. CONCLUSION: Although the short delay observed in the onset and attainment of complete sensory and motor block may theoretically delay the start of surgery for 10-15 minutes but clinically that time will be spent in the preparation of surgical field. So this combination can be used safely and effectively in intravenous regional anesthesia for upper limb orthopedic surgeries with reduced chance of local anesthetic toxicity.
JUSTIFICATIVA Y OBJETIVOS: La anestesia regional intravenosa (ARIV) para cirugías de miembros superiores con la tradicional dosis alta de lidocaína, puede conllevar a efectos colaterales que amenazan la vida. Para evitar esos efectos colaterales potencialmente amenazadores, muchas técnicas modificadas de ARIV fueron experimentadas con el uso de una dosis baja de lidocaína, relajante muscular y opioide. MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS: El presente estudio se hizo con 60 pacientes no medicados previamente, con clasificación ASA 1-2, para comparar las características sensoriales y motoras, los parámetros cardiorrespiratorios y los efectos colaterales durante el período intraoperatorio y de deflación pos torniquete, entre los pacientes que recibieron 40 mL de lidocaína al 0,5% sola (n = 30) y los que recibieron una combinación de 40 mL de lidocaína al 0,25% con 0,05 mg de fentanilo y 0,5 mg de vecuronio (n = 30) en ARIV para cirugías ortopédicas de miembros superiores. Los resultados se analizaron usando el teste t de Student pareado para identificar la significancia estadística. RESULTADO: La diferencia entre los dos grupos con relación al tiempo promedio de inicio y completo bloqueo sensitivo y motor, fue estadísticamente significativo. Sin embargo, hubo un completo bloqueo sensitivo y motor en ambos grupos 15 minutos después de la inyección de la solución anestésica. CONCLUSIONES: Aunque la pequeña demora observada al inicio y durante la obtención completa de los bloqueos sensitivo y motor, teóricamente pueda atrasar el inicio de la operación entre 10 y 15 minutos, clínicamente ese tiempo se gastaría en la preparación del campo quirúrgico. Por tanto, esa combinación puede ser usada con seguridad y eficacia en la anestesia regional intravenosa para las cirugías ortopédicas de miembros superiores con menor posibilidad de toxicidad anestésica local.