Rapid sequence induction(RSI) in trauma patients: Insights from healthcare providers

BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe the current practice of emergency physicians and anaesthesiologists in the selection of drugs for rapid-sequence induction(RSI) among trauma patients.METHODS: A prospective survey audit was conducted based on a self-administered questionnaire among two intubating specialties. The preferred type and dose of hypnotics, opioids, and muscle relaxants used for RSI in trauma patients were sought in the questionnaire. Data were compared for the use of induction agent, opioid use and muscle relaxant among stable and unstable trauma patients by the intubating specialties.RESULTS: A total of 102 participants were included; 47 were anaesthetists and 55 were emergency physicians. Propofol(74.5%) and Etomidate(50.0%) were the most frequently used induction agents. Significantly higher proportion of anesthesiologist used Propofol whereas, Etomidate was commonly used by emergency physicians in stable patients(P=0.001). Emergency physicians preferred Etomidate(63.6%) and Ketamine(20.0%) in unstable patients. The two groups were comparable for opioid use for stable patients. In unstable patients, use of opioid differed significantly by intubating specialties. The relation between rocuronium and suxamethonium use did change among the anaesthetists. Emergency physicians used more suxamethonium(55.6% vs. 27.7%, P=0.01) in stable as well as unstable(43.4 % vs. 27.7%, P=0.08) patients.CONCLUSION: There is variability in the use of drugs for RSI in trauma patients amongst emergency physicians and anaesthesiologists. There is a need to develop an RSI protocol using standardized types and dose of these agents to deliver an effective airway management for trauma patients.

Beliefs and Clinical Practice for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) Managed by Physiotherapists on the South Island of New Zealand

On the South Island of New Zealand, Anaesthetists and other Medical Professionals, frequently refer their patients with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) for physiotherapy management. Beliefs about what is important for the management of patients with CRPS are lacking across all medical and allied health disciplines. Difficulties are no gold standard for diagnosis and evidence for intervention methods is moderate or can be conflicting. This paper explores what Physiotherapists believe to be important in a clinical setting for their management of CRPS, as well as documenting and evaluating their interventional methods used in everyday clinical practice across the region of the South Island of New Zealand. This has not been recorded before. Eighty-one Physiotherapists replied to questions on their usual treatment interventions for the management of CRPS, their frequency of use of these treatment interventions, and what they believed to be important in the management of pain and improvement of function. The results demonstrated that CRPS is not a common condition seen regularly by Physiotherapists;that there is a high level of variation between the physiotherapy interventions used and that Physiotherapists’ beliefs regarding interventions used for pain management and functional restoration differ. Education was reported as the most frequently used intervention method. Those physiotherapists seeing CRPS patients more frequently are more likely to use evidence based intervention methods like graded motor imagery or sensory motor training.

Estimation of Endotracheal Tube Cuff Pressure in a Large Teaching Hospital in Ghana

Background: Maintenance of optimal Endotracheal Tube cuff Pressure (ETTcP) in anaesthetic practice reduces cuff pressure complications. Aneroid manometers for measurement of ETTcP are not widely available in Ghana, hence anaesthesia providers estimate ETTcP according to their experience. The study assessed ETTcP obtained from estimation techniques between anaesthesia providers at Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital (KBTH). It also evaluated the Volume of Air Required (VAR) to obtain an acceptable cuff inflation pressure for sizes 7.0 and 8.0 mm adult endotracheal tubes used at the hospital, and the effect of patient’s age, weight and height on this volume. Methods: Eighty-one patients who underwent general anaesthesia were recruited. ETTcP was measured using an aneroid manometer via a three-way tap. After full cuff deflation, the cuff was refilled with air until an ETTcP of 20 cm H2O was obtained. Independent t-test was used to measure the statistical variations in the ETTcP using estimation techniques in relation to recommended levels as well as the significant difference of mean VAR to obtain a cuff pressure of 20 cm H2O. Grouped t-test was used to determine significant differences in ETTcP between anaesthesia providers using estimation techniques. Results: Mean ETTcP obtained from estimation techniques was (61.87, 73.79) cm H2O. The mean ETTcP measured for Physician and Nurse Anaesthetists were 65.36 cm H20 and 69.52 cm H2O respectively. The mean VAR to achieve an ETTcP of 20 cm H2O for endotracheal tube sizes 7.0 mm and 8.0 mm were 3.90 ± 1.13 mls and 4.55 ± 0.95 mls respectively. Age and weight significantly influenced the VAR to achieve a cuff pressure of 20 cm H2O, however, height did not. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that cuff pressures obtained by estimation techniques were generally higher than the recommended average with no significant difference between anaesthesia providers. However, in the absence of an aneroid manometer, ETTcP of tube sizes 7.0 mm and 8.0 mm can be safely approximated to the recommended levels with predetermined inflation volumes.