Knowledge and practice of tracheal tube cuff pressure monitoring: a multicenter survey of anaesthesia and critical care providers in a developing country.

BACKGROUND: Tracheal tubes are routinely used during anaesthesia and in the intensive care unit. Subjective monitoring of cuff pressures have been reported to produce consistently inappropriate cuffs pressures, with attendant morbidity. But this practice of unsafe care remains widespread. With the proliferation of intensive care units in Nigeria and increasing access to surgery, morbidity relating to improper tracheal cuff pressure may assume a greater toll. We aimed to evaluate current knowledge and practice of tracheal cuff pressure monitoring among anaesthesia and critical care providers in Nigeria. METHODS: This was a multicenter cross-sectional study conducted from March 18 to April 30, 2021. The first part (A) was conducted at 4 tertiary referral hospitals in Nigeria by means of a self-administered questionnaire on the various cadre of anaesthesia and critical care providers. The second part (B) was a nation-wide telephone survey of anaesthesia faculty fellows affiliated to 13 tertiary hospitals in Nigeria, selected by stratified random sampling. RESULTS: Only 3.1% (6/196) of the care providers admitted having ever used a tracheal cuff manometer, while 31.1% knew the recommended tracheal cuff pressure. The nationwide telephone survey of anaesthesia faculty fellows revealed that tracheal cuff manometer is neither available, nor has it ever been used in any of the 13 tertiary hospitals surveyed. The 'Pilot balloon palpation method' and 'fixed volume of air from a syringe' were the most commonly utilized method of cuff pressure estimation by the care providers, at 64.3% and 28.1% respectively in part A survey (84.6% and 15.4% respectively, in the part B survey). CONCLUSION: The use of tracheal cuff manometer is very limited among the care providers surveyed in this study. Knowledge regarding tracheal cuff management among the providers is adjudged to be fair, despite the poor practice and unsafe care.

Efficacy of intravenous tramadol in the control of shivering following spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of intravenous tramadol in control of shivering in obstetric patients under spinal anaesthesia and to determine the minimal dose of tramadol that is effective. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, randomised, double-blind, cross-sectional study of 144 pregnant women at term who had an indication for caesarean section. The patients were randomly allocated into three groups at the occurrence of shivering. Group T0.5 received 0.5 mg/kg of tramadol (n = 47), Group T0.25 received 0.25 mg/kg tramadol (n = 47) and Group TNS received 0.05 ml/kg of normal saline (n = 46). Statistical analysis was performed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 17. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to age, weight and duration of surgery. There was a statistically significant difference in the time of cessation of shivering after the treatment for various groups (P = 0.000). A total of 80.1% responded to the treatment in Group T0.5, while for Group T0.25 and TNS, a total of 44.7% and 4.3%, respectively, responded. There were statistically significant differences in the recurrence rates of shivering among the groups (P = 0.000). CONCLUSION: Tramadol is effective in control of shivering during spinal anaesthesia in obstetric patients. Tramadol 0.5 mg/kg controlled shivering better than 0.25 mg/kg. Therefore, 0.5 mg/kg of tramadol can be used to manage shivering following caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia.

A retrospective study of the outcome of cesarean section for women with severe pre-eclampsia in a third world setting.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome of subarachnoid block (spinal anesthesia) and general anesthesia in Cesarean delivery for women with severe pre-eclampsia. METHODS: A retrospective study of women with severe pre-eclampsia requiring Cesarean section from January 2005 to June 2009 was carried out. Maternal age, parity, gestational age at delivery, booking status, Apgar scores, maternal and perinatal mortality of the sub-arachnoid block group were compared with those of general anesthesia group using χ(2), Student t-test and Fischer exact test. RESULTS: There were no significant difference between the two groups in overall maternal mortality (5.4% vs. 11.9%, P=0.5) and perinatal mortality (2.7% vs. 11.9%, P=0.15). The general anesthesia group had significantly more birth asphyxia than the spinal group (55.9% vs. 27.0%, P=0.0006). CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in the maternal and perinatal mortality outcome of cesarean delivery between women with severe pre-eclampsia who had regional anesthesia and those that had general anesthesia. There was significantly higher proportion of birth asphyxia in babies of women who received general anesthesia.