Detection method of intraoperative awareness: a randomized comparative study.
Autor: | Bektaş M; Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Ankara Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey., Çakan T; Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Ankara Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey., Kırdemir P; Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Etlik Zübeyde Hanım Women's Health Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey., Engin M; Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Ankara Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey., Başar H; Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Ankara Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey. |
---|---|
Jazyk: | angličtina |
Zdroj: | Turkish journal of medical sciences [Turk J Med Sci] 2022 Dec; Vol. 52 (6), pp. 1997-2003. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Dec 21. |
DOI: | 10.55730/1300-0144.5548 |
Abstrakt: | Background: : The incidence of intraoperative awareness varies in a wide range in the literature. The reasons for these different results include the questioning method used and the questioning time. The goal of this study is to compare the effectiveness of different questioning methods and times used in intraoperative awareness research for detecting the incidence. Methods: We recruited patients between the ages of 18-70 years, with normal cognitive functions and able to speak after general anesthesia to the study. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. In Group 1 we applied the modified Brice questionnaire in the first 2 h and 24 h after surgery for investigating intraoperative awareness. In Group 2, 24 h after surgery, we asked about anesthesia satisfaction and patients' complaints, if any. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of age (p = 0.514).The proportion of women was significantly higher (p = 0.002), the duration of anesthesia was shorter, and the rate of narcotic analgesic use was higher in Group 2 (p < 0.001). The assessment in the first 2 h showed the frequency of awareness was statistically higher in Group 1 than in Group 2 (p = 0.016). In the postoperative 24-h assessment, we found no significant difference in the incidence of intraoperative awareness between the groups (p < 0.05). In Group 1, there was no statistically significant difference in terms of incidence of awareness according to evaluation time (p = 250). Discussion: The incidence of intraoperative awareness in Group 1 was significantly higher than in Group 2 in the evaluation conducted in the first 2 h. There was no significant difference in the determination of intraoperative awareness between questioning times in group 1. |
Databáze: | MEDLINE |
Externí odkaz: |