Patient Satisfaction and Its Predictors With Perioperative Anesthesia Care at Two General Hospitals in Southwestern Saudi Arabia.

Introduction  Patient satisfaction is one of the most crucial quality assessment and improvement indicators in anesthesia. Different factors reflect satisfaction such as postoperative pain, procedure duration, patient-physician relationship, inpatient services, and waiting time. A high level of satisfaction can lead to better outcomes in many ways, such as decreasing future surgeries fear and strengthening the healthcare system trust among the population. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the satisfaction level and its predictors with perioperative anesthesia care among patients subjected to different surgeries in two general hospitals in southwestern Saudi Arabia. Methodology  A cross-sectional study was conducted among patients admitted to different surgical specialties at two general hospitals in Al-Qunfudhah governorate in October 2022. Data were collected through interviews with postoperative patients and checking their medical data from the patient's medical reports. However, all surgical patients aged more than 18 consider as inclusion. In contrast, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, local anesthesia, refusal to participate, and cognitive and communication impairment are the exclusion. Perioperative patient satisfaction was assessed using the Leiden Perioperative Care Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (LPPSq). Results Eighty-three of 201 patients were included in the final analysis. The overall level of patient satisfaction concerning perioperative anesthetic care was calculated to be 73.5%. Hospital setting, admission type, BMI, and smoking were statistically associated with perioperative anesthesia patient satisfaction. Additionally, the most frequently reported unpleasant anesthetic side effect was shivering, followed by postoperative pain at a frequency of 42 (50.6%) and 37 (44.6%), respectively. Conclusion A moderate level of patient satisfaction concerning perioperative anesthetic care was detected. Smoking, BMI, admission type, and hospital setting were significantly associated predictors for patients' satisfaction. In order to present a complete picture, we recommend that future research concentrate on additional elements of patient satisfaction, particularly operating room turnover and standards for discharge. Additionally, we propose a routine evaluation before patients' discharge when patients are altering and oriented. Periodic evaluation and enhancement of patient satisfaction with perioperative anesthetic care should be employed and promoted.

Ultrasound guidance versus classical method for intrauterine insemination: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: There is a great controversy regarding the benefits of ultrasound-guided intrauterine insemination (IUI) in improving pregnancy rates. Thus, we aimed to compare ultrasound-guided IUI versus classical IUI regarding the pregnancy rates improvement. METHODS: A systematic search was done in Cochrane Library, PubMed, ISI web of science, and Scopus during June 2021. We selected randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared ultrasound-guided IUI versus classical IUI in different pregnancy outcomes. We extracted the available data from included studies and pooled them in a meta-analysis model using RevMan software. Our primary outcome was clinical pregnancy rate. Our secondary outcomes were miscarriage, live birth rates, and incidence of difficulty reported during the procedure. The overall quality of evidence was assessed through GRADEpro GDT software. RESULTS: Seven RCTs met our inclusion criteria with a total number of 1338 patients. We found that ultrasound-guided IUI significantly improved the clinical pregnancy rate when compared to the classical group (RR = 1.33, 95% CI [1.05, 1.68], p = 0.02). However, there were no significant differences between both groups in terms of miscarriage and live birth rates. Ultrasound-guided IUI significantly reduced the incidence of difficulty reported during the procedure (RR = 0.42, 95% CI [0.21, 0.84], p = 0.01). The GRADEpro GDT tool showed high quality of evidence for the evaluated outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence of high quality that ultrasound-guided IUI improves the pregnancy rate and reduces the incidence of difficulty reported during the procedure.