ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Vitamin D deficiency is now emerging as a major global health problem. Doctors spend most of their time indoors and hence, have very low sun exposure. With limited studies on vitamin D levels of anesthesiologists and no published study from South Asian countries, we planned to determine vitamin D levels in anesthesiologists. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred twenty anesthesiologists, working in two tertiary care hospitals, were enrolled in this study. The participants were asked to complete the questionnaire and blood samples were drawn at the same sitting for measuring serum 25(OH) D and serum calcium levels. A subgroup analysis of anesthesiologists was done based on vitamin D status levels defined as per Endocrine society clinical practice guidelines 2011 on vitamin D deficiency. Vitamin D deficiency: 25(OH) D <20 ng/ml (<50 nmol/l), Vitamin D insufficiency: 25(OH) D of 21-29 ng/ml (52.5-72.5 nmol/l), Vitamin D sufficiency: 25(OH) D of ≥30 ng/ml (≥75 nmol/l). RESULTS: The mean working hours in a day [mean ± standard deviation (SD)] were 10.70 ± 1.56 hours with a range of 8-15 hours. The mean ± SD level of vitamin D in anesthesiologists was 14.56 ± 9.39 ng/ml with a range of 5.30-58.00 ng/ml. Out of 120 anesthesiologists, 101 (84.2%) anesthesiologists had deficient levels of vitamin D, 10 (8.3%) had insufficient levels, and 9 (7.5%) anesthesiologists had sufficient levels of vitamin D. Majority of the anesthesiologists had normal serum calcium levels. A total of 91.5% of doctors had vitamin D deficiency who were not taking vitamin D supplement groups as compared to 28.6% in doctors who had taken vitamin D supplements in the past. CONCLUSION: Prevalence of vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency was high among anesthesiologists. However, levels were optimal in professionals taking vitamin D supplements.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Intraoperative movements are marker of inadequate level of sedation and are undesirable during burr-hole surgery under monitored anesthesia care (MAC). It distracts surgeon, hinders surgical procedure, and may lead to iatrogenic complication. Dexmedetomidine has shown to provide excellent analgesia, cooperative sedation with fewer fluctuations in sedation level during MAC. We compared the effect of dexmedetomidine on intraoperative patient movement, postoperative recovery time, and the surgeon and patient satisfaction scores with commonly used midazolam-fentanyl combination. METHODS: Fifty-two patients undergoing burr-hole surgery for chronic subdural hematoma under MAC were randomly assigned to receive either IV dexmedetomidine 1 µg/kg over 10 minutes followed by continuous infusion 0.03 to 0.07 µg/kg/h (group D) or IV fentanyl 0.5 µg/kg and midazolam 0.03 mg/kg over 10 minutes followed by continuous infusion of 0.5 to 1.16 µg/kg/h fentanyl and 0.03 to 0.07 mg/kg/h midazolam (group M/F) titrated to maintain Ramsay sedation scale 3. Total number of intraoperative patient movements, postoperative recovery time, and patient and surgeon satisfaction scores were recorded. RESULTS: Demographic and baseline characteristics were comparable between the 2 groups. Intraoperative patient movements were significantly less in group D than group M/F (median interquartile range, 1.00 [0.00 to 2.00] vs. 3.00 [1.00 to 3.25], P=0.007). Group D patients showed faster postoperative recovery (mean ± SD, 7.00 ± 6.96 vs. 13.69 ± 6.18 min, P=0.000). Surgeon satisfaction scores were better in group D compared with group M/F (median interquartile range, 1.00 [1.00 to 1.25] vs. 2.00 [1.00 to 2.00], P=0.014). However, patient satisfaction score and hemodynamic parameters were comparable (P>0.05) between both the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Use of dexmedetomidine for MAC is associated with lesser number of intraoperative patient movements, faster postoperative recovery, better surgeon satisfaction score, and comparable patient's satisfaction compared with midazolam-fentanyl combination.
