A Qualitative Description of CRNA Clinical Coordinators' and Student Registered Nurse Anesthetists' Perceptions of Clinical Readiness.

The transition from classroom academic environment to clinical patient-focused learning is a celebrated milestone, yet it is a source of stress and anxiety for student registered nurse anesthetists (SRNAs). In nurse anesthesia education, limited information exists on perceptions of clinical readiness, either from the certified registered nurse anesthetist (CRNA) clinical educators' or the SRNAs' experiences. The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of CRNA clinical coordinators and SRNAs regarding clinical readiness as the students transition from classroom to clinical training. A qualitative descriptive design from a postpositivist philosophical mindset was utilized and a semistructured interview guide and content analysis methodology described by Graneheim and Lundman was used. Seventeen participants were interviewed. Four themes emerged from the analysis of the CRNA clinical coordinators' perceptions: 1) going in with good attitudes and professionalism, 2) the expectation of clinical readiness, 3) mental preparedness, and 4) solid simulation experiences. Additionally, four themes emerged from the content analysis of students' perception: 1) expectations of readiness is higher than anticipated, 2) transitional orientation/adjuncts for preparedness, 3) sound didactic training, and 4) simulation and the effects of COVID-19. While prioritization is different, educators and SRNAs value knowledge, skills (including simulated), and positive attitudes as measures of clinical readiness.

Remifentanil for External Cephalic Version: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The purpose of this study was to examine the efficacy of remifentanil on external cephalic version (ECV) in breech presentation. An extensive search was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and other grey literature. Only randomized controlled trials using remifentanil for ECV were included. Risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) were used to estimate outcomes and quality of evidence was assessed using the Risk of Bias and GRADE system. Five studies consisting of 602 patients were analyzed. Remifentanil resulted in a moderate increase in ECV success rate (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.43; P = .05), a large reduction of pain score (MD, -2.02; 95% CI, -2.32 to -1.72; P < .00001) with fewer transient fetal bradycardia (RR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.85; P = .02). However, remifentanil did not affect cesarean section rates, (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.93; P = .93) instrumental delivery (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.41 to 2.15; P = 0.89), and spontaneous delivery rate (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.35; P = 0.87). Mothers treated with remifentanil have a higher patient satisfaction score. The use of remifentanil may be a good strategy for ECV. However, extrapolation of this finding to clinical settings must consider the study limitations.

Use of Nalbuphine for Treatment of Neuraxial Opioid-Induced Pruritus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Opioid-induced pruritus is prevalent after neuraxial administration of opioid. A number of preventive measures have been reported; however, only a few studies evaluated treatment strategies for established pruritus. The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic profiles of nalbuphine make this drug ideal for the treatment of established pruritus. The primary outcome of this systematic review and meta-analysis was the incidence of pruritus after neuraxial opioid administration. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of sedation and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Pooled estimates were reported by calculating the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Five trials consisting of 494 patients were included for analysis. There was a low quality of evidence that nalbuphine was effective in reducing the incidence of pruritus compared with active control (RR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.93; P = .02). Conversely, there was no difference between the incidence of sedation (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.42 to 2.71; P = .90) and postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR, 1.58, 95% CI, 0.75 to 3.31; P = .23). Although large studies are needed to decrease heterogeneity across studies, the current review showed that nalbuphine appears to reduce the incidence of opioid-induced pruritus.

Prophylactic Nalbuphine to Prevent Neuraxial Opioid-Induced Pruritus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

PURPOSE: Evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic nalbuphine in preventing neuraxial opioid-induced pruritus. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Following the PRISMA statement, PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane and EMBASE were searched for eligible studies. FINDINGS: A total of 17 trials consisting of 1,052 patients were evaluated. Compared to placebo, there is low quality of evidence that nalbuphine was effective in reducing the incidence of pruritus in all patient population (RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.83; P = .0004) and obstetrics (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.98; P = .03). We also found moderate quality of evidence that nalbuphine lowered pruritus in non-obstetrics, the number of rescue pruritus therapy and severity of pruritus episodes. However, nalbuphine did not cause sedation and affect pain scores. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic nalbuphine decreased the incidence and severity of pruritus without adverse effects on sedation and analgesic effect of opioids.