Revista espanola de anestesiologia y reanimacion · 2020
Current practice of rapid sequence induction in adults: A national survey among anesthesiologists in Spain.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sastre J A, López T, Gómez-Ríos M A, Garzón J C, Mariscal M L, Martínez-Hurtado E, Freire-Otero M, Redondo J M, Gómez G, Casalderrey-Rivas M, el Grupo de Estudio en ISR
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Rapid sequence induction (RSI) in adults has undergone changes in recent years due to pharmacological and technological advances. The objective of this survey was to evaluate current practice among Spanish anesthesiologists.
METHODS: A 31-item questionnaire regarding RSI practice was sent to anesthesiologists working in Spanish public hospitals. Differences in responses according to the type of hospital or experience of the respondent were compared for all data using the chi-square and Fisher's exact test.
RESULTS: Approximately 15.89% of Spanish anesthesiologists participated in the survey (1002 questionnaires). The results show considerable heterogeneity in most aspects of RSI. Less than 20% of respondents administer sodium citrate. Sixty-four percent place a nasogastric tube in patients with intestinal obstruction. Gastric residue is assessed by ultrasound in 6% of cases. Only 25% of respondents measure ETO2 to check the effectiveness of preoxygenation, and 22% use nasal oxygen insufflation with nasal prongs or THRIVE. Sixty two percent of respondents apply cricoid pressure, but only 50% release the pressure when encountering intubation difficulty. Up to 40% of respondents reported cases of aspiration despite applying cricoid pressure. Propofol was the most commonly used hypnotic (97.6%), but there was no clear preference in the choice of neuromuscular relaxant (suxamethonium versus rocuronium ratio of approximately 1:1). Only 44% of respondents calculated the dose of sugammadex that would be required for emergency reversal of rocuronium.
CONCLUSIONS: The survey showed significant variation in RSI practice, similar to that of other countries. Quality prospective studies are needed to standardize clinical practice.
METHODS: A 31-item questionnaire regarding RSI practice was sent to anesthesiologists working in Spanish public hospitals. Differences in responses according to the type of hospital or experience of the respondent were compared for all data using the chi-square and Fisher's exact test.
RESULTS: Approximately 15.89% of Spanish anesthesiologists participated in the survey (1002 questionnaires). The results show considerable heterogeneity in most aspects of RSI. Less than 20% of respondents administer sodium citrate. Sixty-four percent place a nasogastric tube in patients with intestinal obstruction. Gastric residue is assessed by ultrasound in 6% of cases. Only 25% of respondents measure ETO2 to check the effectiveness of preoxygenation, and 22% use nasal oxygen insufflation with nasal prongs or THRIVE. Sixty two percent of respondents apply cricoid pressure, but only 50% release the pressure when encountering intubation difficulty. Up to 40% of respondents reported cases of aspiration despite applying cricoid pressure. Propofol was the most commonly used hypnotic (97.6%), but there was no clear preference in the choice of neuromuscular relaxant (suxamethonium versus rocuronium ratio of approximately 1:1). Only 44% of respondents calculated the dose of sugammadex that would be required for emergency reversal of rocuronium.
CONCLUSIONS: The survey showed significant variation in RSI practice, similar to that of other countries. Quality prospective studies are needed to standardize clinical practice.