ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Spinal anesthesia is an effective technique for many surgical procedures, but it is often associated with an increased risk of potentially deleterious hemodynamic disturbances. The benefits of prophylactic ondansetron for preventing spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension are still uncertain. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effect of ondansetron and placebo before spinal block on the incidence of hypotension in patients having non-obstetric surgeries. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, superiority trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio. A total of 144 patients scheduled for non-obstetric surgeries with an indication for spinal anesthesia were randomized. Patients received intravenous ondansetron (8mg) or placebo before standard spinal anesthesia. The primary outcome was the rate of hypotension in the first 30 minutes after spinal anesthesia. RESULTS: Hypotension occurred in 20 of 72 patients (27.8%) in the ondansetron group and in 36 of 72 patients (50%) in the placebo group (Odds Ratio-OR=0.38; 95% Confidence Interval-CI 0.19 to 0.77; p=0.007). Fewer patients in the ondansetron group required ephedrine compared to the placebo group (13.9% vs. 27.8%; OR=0.42; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.98; p=0.04). Exploratory analyses revealed that ondansetron may be more effective than placebo in patients aged 60 years or older (OR=0.12; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.48; p=0.03). No difference in heart rate variations was observed. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that ondansetron can be a viable and effective strategy to reduce both the incidence of spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension and vasopressors usage in non-obstetric surgeries.
Subject(s)
Anesthesia, Spinal , Hypotension, Controlled , Anesthesia, Spinal/adverse effects , Cesarean Section , Female , Humans , Ondansetron , Pregnancy , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
Introdução: O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar os possíveis determinantes para o público escolher os cirurgiões plásticos como especialistas em cirurgia de mão. Métodos: Membros do público (n = 701) escolheram um ou dois especialistas que eles acreditassem serem experts para 11 cenários relacionados à cirurgia de mão. Análises bivariadas e multivariadas foram aplicadas para avaliar os possíveis determinantes (dados sociodemográficos, fontes de informações e contato prévio com a cirurgia plástica) para o público escolher os cirurgiões plásticos como especialistas em cirurgia de mão. Resultados: Houve uma compreensão limitada (p < 0,05 para todas as comparações) sobre o papel dos cirurgiões plásticos em infecção da mão, tumor da mão, fratura da mão, lesão tendinosa da mão, síndrome do túnel do carpo, artrite reumatoide e contratura de Dupuytren. Apenas a idade foi um (p < 0,05 para todas as comparações) determinante significativo de cirurgião plástico como um padrão de resposta. Conclusão: A idade foi um fator determinante da escolha pública de cirurgiões plásticos como especialistas em arena de cirurgia da mão.
Introduction: To assess the possible determinants that lead public to choose plastic surgeons as hand surgery specialists. Methods: General public members (n = 701) were asked to choose one or two specialists that they perceived to be an expert in 11 hand surgery-related scenarios. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were applied to assess the possible determinants (sociodemographic data, source of reported information, and previous plastic surgery contact) of public choice of plastic surgeons as experts in the hand surgery-related scenarios. Results: A significantly (all p < 0.05) poor understanding of the role of plastic surgeons was seen in infectious hand injury, hand tumor, hand fracture, hand tendon injury, carpal tunnel syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis deformity, and dupuytren contracture. Age was a significant (all p < 0.05) determinant of plastic surgeon as a response pattern. Conclusion: Participants' age was a determinant of public choose plastic surgeons as experts in hand surgery area.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , History, 21st Century , Social Perception , Surgery, Plastic , Surgery, Plastic/methods , Cross-Sectional Studies , Orthopedic Surgeons , Hand , Hand/surgeryABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this survey was to assess the public's knowledge and attitudes toward vascularized composite allotransplantation and donation. METHODS: Members of the public (n = 5942) were surveyed using a questionnaire that examined their knowledge and attitudes concerning solid organs (kidney, heart, liver, lung, and pancreas) and vascularized composite tissue (hand/upper extremity, lower extremity, abdominal wall, and face) transplantations and donations. RESULTS: Respondents demonstrated greater (all P < 0.05) knowledge and willingness to donate and/or receive solid organs than vascularized composite tissues. Educational level, accurate knowledge, willingness to donate, and willingness to receive were significant (all P < 0.05) determinants of acceptance to donate and/or receive hand/upper extremity, lower extremity, face, and/or abdominal wall. CONCLUSION: The public presented less knowledge and willingness to donate and/or receive hand/upper extremity, lower extremity, abdominal wall, and face. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.
