Practices of anaesthesiologists with regard to withholding and withdrawal of life support from the critically ill in Turkey

BACKGROUND

To determine practices of Turkish anaesthesiologists with regard to withholding and withdrawal of life support from the critically ill.

METHODS

An anonymous questionnaire consisting of 18 questions was mailed to 439 members of the Turkish Society of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation.

RESULTS

Three hundred and 69 questionnaires were returned (84% response). Over 90% of the respondents indicated that they were Muslim. We found that 66% of respondents had initiated written or oral do-not-resuscitate orders, most frequently after discussion with colleagues (82%).

CONCLUSIONS

While a number of similarities were found between Turkish anaesthesiologists and those from other countries, some specific differences could be identified, particularly related to consensus decision-making and sharing information with other providers and the value of Ethics Committees in the decision-making process.

The Soft Seal disposable laryngeal mask airway in adults: comparison of two insertion techniques without intra-oral manipulation

We investigated whether insertion of the disposable Soft Seal laryngeal mask airway (SSLM) was successful without intra-oral digital manipulation. One hundred patients undergoing anaesthesia using the SSLM were randomly assigned into two groups. Insertion was performed by either a direct or a rotational technique, both without intra-oral digital manipulation. The primary outcome measure was successful insertion at first attempt. Other outcomes included insertion time, fibreoptic assessment of the airway view and airway morbidity. The first attempt success rate was higher (98%) with the direct technique than with the rotational technique (75%; p = 0.002) but insertion time was faster with the latter method (mean [range] 15 [8-50] s) than with the direct method (20 [8-56] s; p = 0.035). Fibreoptic assessment and airway morbidity were similar in both groups. We conclude that the SSLM can be successfully inserted without intra-oral digital manipulation.

Comparison of Sedation Requirements for Cataract Surgery under Topical Anesthesia or Retrobulbar Block

PURPOSE

Topical anesthesia is increasingly being used for cataract surgery. However, it is believed that topical anesthesia causes an increased risk of intraoperative complications from unrestricted eye movement and insufficient pain control and more need for sedation. It is difficult to compare pain and anxiety experienced by individual patients; therefore, the authors used the method of patient-controlled sedation to determine whether there is a difference in sedation requirements under topical or retrobulbar anesthesia.

METHODS

In this prospective study, patients received either topical anesthesia (n=87) or retrobulbar block (n=104) and self-administered a mixture of midazolam (0.5 mg) and fentanyl (25 microg) in increments using a patient controlled analgesia infuser to achieve sedation. At the end of surgery, patients rated their pain on a 10-point numerical rating scale and their comfort on a 5-point scale. The number of demands and deliveries were noted from the patient controlled analgesia infuser display.

RESULTS

Pain scores were between 0 and 2 in 95.4% in the topical and in 94.2% in the retrobulbar group (p>0.05). Patient comfort was equal in both groups with 2.94+/-0.92 in the topical group and 2.92+/-0.99 in the retrobulbar group (p>0.05). Mean sedation requirements were similar in both groups: 26.4% of patients in the topical group and 19.2% in the retrobulbar group did not request any sedation (not significant, p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Sedation requirements were similar for cataract surgery under topical and retrobulbar anesthesia.