Comparing the squatting position and traditional sitting position for ease of spinal needle placement: a randomized clinical trial
Sussan Soltani Mohammadi, Marzieh Hassani, Seyed Mojtaba Marashi, Sussan Soltani Mohammadi, Marzieh Hassani, Seyed Mojtaba Marashi
Abstract
Background: previous evidences suggested that traditional sitting position (flexion of knees approximately 90°, and adduction of hips while feet rest on a stool) and hamstring stretch position (sitting position with maximum extension of knees, adduction of hips, and forward bending) both reversed the lumbar lordosis and the number of spinal needle-bone contacts were identical when placing patients in these positions for neuraxial block.
Objectives: In this study, we suggested that squatting position reverses the lumbar lordosis and reduces the number of spinal needle bone contacts better than a traditional sitting position.
Patients and methods: Two hundred and thirty six patients ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologist) class I or II aged 18 to 75 years scheduled for elective surgeries under elective spinal anesthesia were randomized into two groups. We compared the traditional sitting and squatting positions. Our primary endpoint was the number of spinal needle-bone contacts, and secondary endpoint was ease of needle insertion or space identification.
Results: The total number of spinal needle bone contact was statistically lower in the squatting position compared to traditional sitting position group (222 versus 230 respectively, P = 0.01). Insertion of needle was easy in 97 (87%) and 94 (84%) of patients and difficult in 20 (18%) and 17 (15%) of patients in traditional sitting and squatting positions, respectively (P = 0.59 and P = 0.12). Needle insertion was not impossible in any patients.
Conclusions: In squatting position the number of spinal needle-bone contacts was lower compared to the traditional sitting position, nonetheless ease of needle insertion or space identification was the same in the both groups.
Keywords: Anesthesia, Spinal; Spinal Needle; Squatting Position; Traditional Sitting Position.
Figures
References
- Tashayod ME, Tamadon S. Spinal block in sitting position without moving the legs. Middle East J Anaesthesiol. 1980;5(8):529–33.
- Stokes IA, Abery JM. Influence of the hamstring muscles on lumbar spine curvature in sitting. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1980;5(6):525–8.
- Fisher KS, Arnholt AT, Douglas ME, Vandiver SL, Nguyen DH. A randomized trial of the traditional sitting position versus the hamstring stretch position for labor epidural needle placement. Anesth Analg. 2009;109(2):532–4. doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e3181ac6c79.
- Brown DL. Spinal epidural and caudal anesthesia. In: Miller RD, editor. Miller's Anesthesia. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone/Elsevier; 2010.
- Sandoval M, Shestak W, Sturmann K, Hsu C. Optimal patient position for lumbar puncture, measured by ultrasonography. Emerg Radiol. 2004;10(4):179–81. doi: 10.1007/s10140-003-0286-3.
- Biswas BK, Agarwal B, Bhattarai B, Dey S, Bhattacharyya P. Straight versus flex back: Does it matter in spinal anaesthesia? Indian J Anaesth. 2012;56(3):259–64. doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.98772.
- Golfam P, Yari M, Bakhtiyari HR. Minimum appropriate dose of lidocaine with a fixed dose of sufentanil epinephrine used for spinal anesthesia in caesarian section. Anesth Pain Med. 2013;2(3):123–6. doi: 10.5812/aapm.7810.
- Fathi M, Imani F, Joudi M, Goodarzi V. Comparison Between the Effects of Ringer`s Lactate and Hydroxyethyl Starch on Hemodynamic Parameters After Spinal Anesthesia: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Anesth Pain Med. 2013;2(3):127–33. doi: 10.5812/aapm.7850.
- Etezadi F, Karimi Yarandi K, Ahangary A, Shokri H, Imani F, Safari S, et al. The effect of needle type, duration of surgery and position of the patient on the risk of transient neurologic symptoms. Anesth Pain Med. 2013;2(4):154–8. doi: 10.5812/aapm.6916.
Source: PubMed