Wrist acupressure for post-operative nausea and vomiting (WrAP): A pilot study.

Post-operative nausea and vomiting are undesirable complications following anaesthesia and surgery. It is thought that acupressure might prevent nausea and vomiting through an alteration in endorphins and serotonin levels. In this two-group, parallel, superiority, randomised control pilot trial we aimed to test pre-defined feasibility outcomes and provide preliminary evidence for the efficacy of PC 6 acupoint stimulation vs. placebo for reducing post-operative nausea and vomiting in cardiac surgery patients. Eighty patients were randomly assigned to either an intervention PC 6 acupoint stimulation via beaded intervention wristbands group (n=38) or placebo sham wristband group (n=42). The main outcome was assessment of pre-defined feasibility criteria with secondary outcomes for nausea, vomiting, rescue anti-emetic therapy, quality of recovery and adverse events. Findings suggest that a large placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial to test the efficacy of PC 6 stimulation on PONV in the post-cardiac surgery population is feasible and justified given the preliminary clinically significant reduction in vomiting in the intervention group in this pilot. The intervention was tolerated well by participants and if wrist acupressure of PC 6 acupoint is proven effective in a large trial it is a simple non-invasive intervention that could easily be incorporated into practice.

A pilot trial of bordered polyurethane dressings, tissue adhesive and sutureless devices compared with standard polyurethane dressings for securing short-term arterial catheters.

OBJECTIVES: To improve arterial catheter (AC) securement and reduce AC failure; to assess feasibility of a large randomised controlled trial. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A four-arm, parallel, randomised, controlled, non-blinded pilot trial with 195 intensive care patients taking part, in a tertiary referral hospital in Brisbane, Australia from May to November 2012. INTERVENTIONS: Standard polyurethane (SPU) dressing (controls); bordered polyurethane (BPU) + SPU dressing; tissue adhesive (TA) + SPU dressing; and sutureless securement device (SSD) + SPU dressing (no sutures used). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: AC failure, ie, complete dislodgement, occlusion (monitor failure, inability to infuse or fluid leaking), pain or infection (local or blood). RESULTS: Median AC dwell time was 26.2 hours and was comparable between groups. AC failure occurred in 26/195 patients (13%). AC failure was significantly worse with SPU dressings (10/47 [21%]) than with BPU + SPU dressings (2/ 43 [5%]; P = 0.03), but not significantly different to TA + SPU (6/56 [11%]; P = 0.18) or SSD + SPU (8/49 [16%]; P = 0.61). The dressing applied at AC insertion lasted until AC removal in 68% of controls; 56% of BPU + SPU dressings; 73% of TA + SPU dressings; and 80% of SSD + SPU dressings (all P > 0.05). There were no infections or serious adverse events. Patient and staff satisfaction with all products was high. Median costs (labour and materials) for securement per patient were significantly higher in all groups compared with the control group (SPU, $3.48 [IQR, $3.48-$9.79]; BPU + SPU, $5.07 [IQR, $5.07-$12.99]; SSD + SPU, $10.90 [IQR, $10.90-$10.90]; TA + SPU, $17.70 [IQR, $17.70-$38.36]; all P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: AC failure occurred significantly less often with BPU + SPU dressings than with SPU dressings. TA + SPU and SSD + SPU dressings should be further investigated and compared with BPU + SPU dressings as controls. The novel approach of TA + SPU dressings appeared safe and feasible.