On-Line Assessment (OLA) as a preparation for the European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (EDAIC), a retrospective observational study on the results and the potential impact on the Part-I examination.

BACKGROUND: The EDAIC is a diploma of the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC). which is obtained after passing two a written MCQ-based (Part1) and a structured oral (part2) examinationIn 2011, a formative On-Line Assessment (OLA) was introduced to help candidates to prepare for EDAIC Part1 examination (EDAIC-I). This retrospective observational study evaluated the results of the OLA and its impact on the EDAIC-1 between 2013 and 2019. METHODS: After obtaining the authorisation from the ESAIC Examinations Committee, all the results of candidates registered to OLA and/or EDAIC-I between 2013 and 2019 were included. The total number of registrations and the results were analysed and compared for both. RESULTS: Over 17,000 candidates (17,401) sat any of the written exams of the EDAIC. The overall pass-rate for the EDAIC-1 was 68.95%. The OLA score increased significantly with the number of attempts for Paper A (Basic Science) (p=0.006). Overall success of the EDAIC-I was higher in candidates who took the OLA before (72.9% versus 68.3%; OR: 1.25; 95% CI [1.12; 1.39]; p<0.001). Candidates who failed in their first attempt for EDAIC-I were more likely to sit the exam again if they had performed the OLA before (OR: 1.396, 95% CI [1.237; 1.574]; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The OLA was associated with an improvement of the results in basic science and success rate in the EDAIC-I.

Comparison of the analgesic efficacy and respiratory effects of morphine, tramadol and codeine after craniotomy.

Pain after craniotomy remains a significant problem. The effect of morphine and tramadol patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) on arterial carbon dioxide tension is unknown in patients having such surgery. Sixty craniotomy patients were randomly allocated to receive morphine PCA, tramadol PCA or codeine phosphate 60 mg intramuscularly. Baseline values of pain score (0-10), sedation and arterial carbon dioxide tension were recorded at the time of first analgesic administration and at 30 min, 1, 4, 8, 12, 18 and 24 h. Patient satisfaction was assessed at 24 h. There were no differences in arterial carbon dioxide tension or sedation between groups at any time, but in all three groups some patients had rises greater than 1 kPa. Morphine produced significantly better analgesia than tramadol at all time points (p < 0.005) and better analgesia than codeine at 4, 12 and 18 h. Patients were more satisfied with morphine than with codeine or tramadol (p < 0.001). Vomiting and retching occurred in 50% of patients with tramadol, compared with 20% with morphine and 29% with codeine.

Haemodynamic effects of the prone position: a comparison of propofol total intravenous and inhalation anaesthesia.

The haemodynamic changes of the prone position were investigated in 40 ASA I-II patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery. Patients were randomly assigned, following propofol intravenous induction, to receive maintenance of anaesthesia using either isoflurane 1-1.2% in air or target controlled propofol 3 microg.ml(-1) infusion. Measurements of non-invasive blood pressure, heart rate and cardiac output were made in the supine position. The patient was then turned prone onto a Montreal pattern mattress and measurements repeated. Cardiac output measurements were made using a non-invasive cardiac output monitor. We found a significant reduction in cardiac index in both groups and a significantly greater change with propofol compared to isoflurane on turning supine to prone (CI change 0.4 vs 0.7 l.min(-1).m(-2) p = 0.001 and SVRI change 89 vs 177 dyne.s(-1).cm(-5), p = 0.041). We conclude that turning healthy patients prone produces a clinically significant reduction in cardiac output, the change being greater during maintenance of anaesthesia using propofol compared to isoflurane.

Hypotension following combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia for Caesarean section. Left lateral position vs. tilted supine position.

Eighty-seven pregnant mothers undergoing elective Caesarean section were randomly allocated either to the full left lateral position (n = 45) or to the supine position with 12 degrees left lateral tilt (n = 42) after a combined spinal-epidural (CSE) in the sitting position and an initial 2 min in the full right lateral position. Fewer mothers were hypotensive while in the study position [29 (64%) in lateral group vs. 38 (90%) in the tilted supine group; p = 0.03]. Mothers in the lateral group tended to become hypotensive after turning them back to the tilted supine position immediately before surgery; hence the number of mothers who were hypotensive from the insertion of the CSE until delivery were similar [36 (80%) vs. 38 (90%)]. Mothers in the lateral group needed a lower dose of ephedrine to treat their hypotension while in their study position (median (interquartile range [range]) 6 (0-12 [0-36]) mg vs. 12 (6-18 [0-36]) mg, respectively; p = 0.04) but ephedrine requirements were similar overall (12 (6-12 [0-36]) mg vs. 12 (6-18 [0-36]) mg), respectively. The full left lateral position reduces the incidence of early hypotension compared with the tilted supine position with tilt, and makes it easier to treat.

Evaluation of S1 motor block to determine a safe, reliable test dose for epidural analgesia.

BACKGROUND: Accidental intrathecal injection of bupivacaine during epidural analgesia in labour remains a hazard, with the potential to cause total spinal anaesthesia and maternal collapse. Sacral block appears early after intrathecal injections compared with epidural ones, and we therefore used SI motor block to determine a safe and reliable test dose for epidural catheter misplacement. METHODS: Mothers booked for elective Caesarean section were given various intrathecal doses of bupivacaine with fentanyl during routine combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia. RESULTS: Using sequential allocation we found that the ED50 for SI motor block 10 min after intrathecal injection was bupivacaine 7 mg with fentanyl 14 micrograms (95% CI, 6.2-7.8 mg). We then used intrathecal bupivacaine 13 mg to look for the ED95. We found the calculated ED97.5 to be bupivacaine 9.7 mg with fentanyl 19.4 micrograms (95% CI, 8.7-11.4). CONCLUSION: We conclude that testing for SI motor block 10 min after epidural injection of bupivacaine 10 mg is a reliable test to detect accidental intrathecal injection in the obstetric population.