Comparison of forced-air warming systems in prevention of intraoperative hypothermia.

In this study, we aimed to compare the effects of forced-air warming upper body blankets and forced-air warming underbody blankets on intraoperative hypothermia in patients who were planned to undergo open abdominal surgical operations in which extensive heat loss occurs. This prospective and randomized study included 92 patients who would undergo lower abdominal surgery under general anesthesia. Patients were randomized by closed envelope method and divided into two groups. Group I (n:46) included the patients who would receive warming with forced-air warming upper body blanket, and Group II (n:46) consisted of the patients who received warming with forced-air warming underbody blanket. Central body temperature was recorded by measuring with a temperature probe placed in distal esophagus. Demographic data, amount of fentanyl, crystalloid and blood products used, duration of operation, type of operation, hemodynamic parameters, shivering and thermal damage information were recorded. There was not any statistically significant difference among the patients in terms of demographic data, amount of fentanyl, crystalloid and blood products used, duration and type of operation and hemodynamic parameters. No difference was found between the groups in terms of body temperatures (Group I:36.1 °C, Group II:36.3 °C, respectively) (P > 0.05). Forced air warming underbody blanket can be as effective as forced-air warming upper body blankets in preventing intraoperative hypothermia. They can be alternative in cases where use of forced-air warming upper body blankets is not feasible.

Assessment of Some Public Hospitals in Turkey Regarding Anaesthetist, Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Equipment.

OBJECTIVE: Every year, 230 million patients undergo major general surgery with anaesthesia worldwide, and 7 million resulted with major complications. Monitorisation and equipment has a great role in increasing patient safety and safe surgery during anaesthesia. METHODS: Turkey is divided into 12 Eurostut-NUTS regions and 26 subregions statistically. Totally, 303 hospitals that are included in these regions were enrolled in this descriptive trial. The hospitals were contacted by telephone between October 2012 and August 2013. Data collecting forms were e-mailed to any of the anaesthetists or anaesthesia technicians of the hospital and they were requested to fill the forms and forward them to one of the investigators. RESULTS: Data were obtained from 221 of 303 hospitals (73%). Twenty-three hospitals were tertiary (university and education and research), 21 were city and 177 were county hospitals. No anaesthetist, operating rooms or intensive care units were available in 114 of the county hospitals. Anaesthetists were responsible for 61% of these active working theatres. Electrocardiogram, heart rate, non-invasive blood pressure and saturation could be monitored in 97% of them. End-tidal carbon dioxide could be monitored in 91% of at least one operating room in these hospitals. However, if the subject became to end-tidal carbon dioxide monitoring in every room, this ratio decreased to 63%. Defibrillators were absent in 6% of these rooms. Adult intensive care units were available in 33% of the hospitals and paediatric intensive care units were available in 32.4%; the responsibility of these intensive care units were carried out by anaesthetists at a 91.4% ratio. End-tidal carbon dioxide could be monitored in 54% of these units; invasive monitorisation could be applied in 68.4% if needed. CONCLUSION: It was observed that hospitals have different standards according to their infrastructures of anaesthesia and intensive care unit equipment. We think that the elimination of these differences is an important step with respect to increasing patient safety and enhancement of the service quality in hospitals.