Comparison of three sitting positions for combined spinal - epidural anesthesia: a multicenter randomized controlled trial

Mehmet Özgür Özhan, Ceyda Özhan Çaparlar, Mehmet Anıl Süzer, Mehmet Burak Eskin, Bülent Atik, Mehmet Özgür Özhan, Ceyda Özhan Çaparlar, Mehmet Anıl Süzer, Mehmet Burak Eskin, Bülent Atik

Abstract

Background and objectives: The aim of this prospective, multi-centered and multi-arm parallel randomized trial was to test the hypothesis that modified sitting positions including hamstring stretch position (HSP) and squatting position (SP) would reduce needle - bone contact events and increase the success rate of combined spinal - epidural anesthesia (CSEA) compared to traditional sitting position (TSP) in patients undergoing total knee or hip arthroplasty.

Patients and methods: Three hundred and sixty American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-III patients, aged between 45-85 years were randomly allocated to one of three groups using computer-generated simple randomization: group TSP (n = 120), group HSP (n = 120), and group SP (n = 120). Primary outcome measures were the number of needle-bone contact and success rates. Secondary outcome measure was the ease of interspinous space identification.

Results: Seven patients in group SP and four of HSP could not tolerate their position and were excluded. Number of needle-bone contact, success rates, and grade of interspinous space identification were similar between groups (p = 1.000). Independent of positioning, the success rates were higher in patients whose interspinous space was graded as easy compared to difficult or impossible (p < 0.001). Success rates reduced, interspinous space identification became more challenging, and number of needle - bone contact increased as patient's body mass index (BMI) increased (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: SP and HSP may be used as alternatives to the TSP. BMI and ease of interspinous space identification may be considered important determinants for CSEA success.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03541798.

Keywords: Arthroplasty; Combined spinal epidural anesthesia; Hamstring stretch position; Squatting position; Traditional sitting position.

Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Editora Ltda.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Traditional sitting position. The picture shows the positions of the patient, the nurse anesthetist, and the anesthesiologist.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Hamstring stretch position. The picture shows the positions of the patient, the nurse anesthetist, and the anesthesiologist.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Squatting position. The picture shows the positions of the patient, the nurse anesthetist, and the anesthesiologist.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Diagram showing the flow of participants through each stage of the trial.

References

    1. de Filho G.R., Gomes H.P., da Fonseca M.H., et al. Predictors of successful neuraxial block: a prospective study. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2002;19:447–451.
    1. Ružman T., Gulam D., Drenjančević I.H., et al. Factors associated with difficult neuraxial blockade. Local Reg Anesth. 2014;7:47–52.
    1. Rhee Wj, Chung Cj, Lim Yh, et al. Factors in patient dissatisfaction and refusal regarding spinal anesthesia. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2010;59:260–264.
    1. Gurunathan U., Kunju S.M., Hay K.E., et al. Usefulness of a visual aid in achieving optimal positioning for spinal anesthesia: a randomized trial. BMC Anesthesiol. 2018;18:11.
    1. Tashayod M.E., Tamadon S. Spinal block in sitting position without moving the legs. Middle East J Anaesthesiol. 1980;5:529–533.
    1. Fisher K.S., Arnholt A.T., Douglas M.E., et al. A randomized trial of the traditional sitting position versus the hamstring stretch position for labor epidural needle placement. Anesth Analg. 2009;109:532–534.
    1. Soltani Mohammadi S., Hassani M., Marashi S.M. Comparing the squatting position and traditional sitting position for ease of spinal needle placement: a randomized clinical trial. Anesth Pain Med. 2014;4
    1. Soltani Mohammadi S., Piri M., Khajehnasiri A. Comparing three different modified sitting positions for ease of spinal needle insertion in patients undergoing spinal anesthesia. Anesth Pain Med. 2017;7
    1. Cook T.M. Combined spinal–epidural techniques. Anaesthesia. 2000;55:42–64.
    1. Antes G. The new CONSORT statement. BMJ. 2010;340:c1432.
    1. Moher D., Hopewell S., Schulz K.F., et al. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;340:c869.
    1. Juszczak E., Altman D.G., Hopewell S., Schulz K. Reporting of Multi-Arm Parallel-Group Randomized Trials: Extension of the CONSORT 2010 Statement. JAMA. 2019;321:1610–1620.
    1. Cohen J. 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum; Hillsdale, NJ: 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences; p. 16.
    1. Altman D.G. Chapman & Hall/CRC; 1991. Practical Statistics for Medical Research.
    1. Alexopoulos E.C. Introduction to multivariate regression analysis. Hippokratia. 2010;14:23–28.
    1. Clinckscales C.P., Greenfield M.L., Vanarese M., et al. An observational study of the relationship between lumbar epidural space depth and body mass index in Michigan parturients. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2007;16:323–327.
    1. Brummett C.M., Williams B.S., Hurley R.W., et al. A Prospective, observational study of the relationship between body mass index and depth of the epidural space during lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injection. Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine. 2009;34:100–105.
    1. Diraçoglu D., Baskent A., Yagci I., et al. Isokinetic strength measurements in early knee osteoarthritis. Acta Reumatol Port. 2009;34:72–77.
    1. Alnahdi A.H., Zeni J.A., Snyder-Mackler L. Muscle impairments in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Sports Health. 2012;4:284–292.
    1. Perlas A., Chaparro L.E., Chin K.J. Lumbar Neuraxial Ultrasound for Spinal and Epidural Anesthesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016;41:251–260.
    1. Şahin T., Balaban O. Lumbar Ultrasonography for Obstetric Neuraxial Blocks: Sonoanatomy and Literature Review. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2018;46:257–267.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbeidspartnere

Medisinsk tilstand

Legemiddelintervensjoner

3
Abonnere