Perioperative Staff's Experiences of Premedication for Children.

PURPOSE: Providing perioperative care for children who express anxiety or react with negative anxiety-associated consequences can be a challenge. The use of premedication is established as an important intervention for young children before surgery, yet research into care providers' experiences of premedication is limited. The aim of this study was to explore perioperative staff's experiences of premedication for preschool-age children. DESIGN: A descriptive inductive qualitative study was performed based on focus group discussions. METHODS: A purposive sample of a team from the operating department with experience in anesthetizing and caring for children in the perioperative period was interviewed in small focus groups: five preoperative and postoperative care nurses, five nurse anesthetists, and five anesthesiologists. The transcribed text was categorized using qualitative content analysis. FINDINGS: The content analysis revealed three themes: a matter of time, do not wake the sleeping bear, and on responsive tiptoes. CONCLUSIONS: Care providers must adapt their work to the child's emotional state of mind and needs, allowing time for the child to trust and accept the premedication and for the premedication to reach its peak effect. Premedication provides light sleep preoperatively, which requires careful treatment of the child to avoid emotional reactions, and the postoperative path is most peaceful when the premedication supports a long duration of sedation. Our findings highlight the need for safety precautions and a permissive and flexible organization with the goal of achieving a smooth and safe journey for the child in the perioperative path.

Postoperative recovery in preschool-aged children: A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial comparing premedication with midazolam, clonidine, and dexmedetomidine.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative anxiety in pediatric patients can worsen postoperative outcomes and delay discharge. Drugs aimed at reducing preoperative anxiety and facilitating postoperative recovery are available; however, their effects on postoperative recovery from propofol-remifentanil anesthesia have not been studied in preschool-aged children. Thus, we aimed to investigate the effects of three sedative premedications on postoperative recovery from total intravenous anesthesia in children aged 2-6 years. METHODS: In this prespecified secondary analysis of a double-blinded randomized trial, 90 children scheduled for ear, nose, and throat surgery were randomized (1:1:1) to receive sedative premedication: oral midazolam 0.5 mg/kg, oral clonidine 4 µg/kg, or intranasal dexmedetomidine 2 µg/kg. Using validated instruments, outcome measures including time for readiness to discharge from the postoperative care unit, postoperative sedation, emergence delirium, anxiety, pain, and nausea/vomiting were measured. RESULTS: After excluding eight children due to drug refusal or deviation from the protocol, 82 children were included in this study. No differences were found between the groups in terms of median time [interquartile range] to readiness for discharge (midazolam, 90 min [48]; clonidine, 80 min [46]; dexmedetomidine 100.5 min [42]). Compared to the midazolam group, logistic regression with a mixed model and repeated measures approach found no differences in sedation, less emergence delirium, and less pain in the dexmedetomidine group, and less anxiety in both clonidine and dexmedetomidine groups. CONCLUSIONS: No statistical difference was observed in the postoperative recovery times between the premedication regimens. Compared with midazolam, dexmedetomidine was favorable in reducing both emergence delirium and pain in the postoperative care unit, and both clonidine and dexmedetomidine reduced anxiety in the postoperative care unit. Our results indicated that premedication with α2 -agonists had a better recovery profile than short-acting benzodiazepines; although the overall recovery time in the postoperative care unit was not affected.

Palonosetron as prophylaxis for post-discharge nausea and vomiting: a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in ambulatory surgery.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 25% of ambulatory surgery patients experience post-discharge nausea and vomiting (PDNV). We aimed to investigate whether palonosetron, a long-acting anti-emetic, decreases the incidence of PDNV in high-risk patients. METHODS: In this prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 170 male and female patients undergoing ambulatory surgery under general anaesthesia, with a high predicted risk for PDNV, were randomised to receive either palonosetron 75 µg i.v. (n=84) or normal saline (n=86) before discharge. During the first 3 postoperative days (PODs), we measured outcomes using a patient questionnaire. The primary outcome was the incidence of a complete response (no nausea, vomiting, or use of rescue medication) until POD 2. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of PDNV each day until POD 3. RESULTS: The incidence of a complete response until POD 2 was 48% (n=32) in the palonosetron group and 36% (n=25) in the placebo group (odds ratio 1.69 [95% confidence interval: 0.85-3.37]; P=0.131). No significant difference in the incidence of PDNV was observed between the two groups on the day of surgery (47% vs 56%; P=0.31). Significant differences in the incidence of PDNV were found on POD 1 (18% vs 34%; P=0.033) and POD 2 (9% vs 27%; P=0.007). No differences were observed on POD 3 (15% vs 13%; P=0.700). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with placebo, palonosetron did not reduce the overall incidence of post-discharge nausea and vomiting up to postoperative day 2. The lower incidence of post-discharge nausea and vomiting on poatoperative days 1 and 2 in the palonosetron group requires further investigation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT 2015-003956-32.

Less use of rescue morphine when a combined PSP/IPP-block is used for postoperative analgesia in breast cancer surgery: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Surgery for breast cancer is common, and intravenous opioids are often used to control postoperative pain. Recently, pectoralis-2 (PECS-2) block has emerged as a promising regional anaesthetic alternative. With nomenclature recently proposed, this block is termed combined PSP/IPP-block (pectoserratus plane block/interpectoral plane block). OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the need for postoperative rescue morphine between the intervention group that received a pre-operative combined PSP/IPP-block and a control group that received peri-operative long-acting opioids for postoperative analgesia. DESIGN: A randomised controlled study. SETTING: Operating theatres of two Swedish hospitals. The patients were recruited between May 2017 and October 2020. PATIENTS: Among the 199 women scheduled to undergo breast cancer surgery (sector resection or radical mastectomy) who were enrolled in the study, 185 were available for follow up. INTERVENTION: All patients received general anaesthesia. The intervention group received a combined PSP/IPP-block before surgery. The control group received intravenous morphine 30 min before emergence from anaesthesia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary endpoint was the cumulative need for intravenous rescue morphine to reach a predefined level of pain control (visual analogue scale score <40 mm) during the first 48 h after surgery. RESULTS: Data from 92 and 93 patients in the intervention and control groups, respectively, were analysed. The amount of rescue morphine administered in the 48 h after surgery was significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group (median: 2.25 vs 3.0 mg, P  = 0.021). The first measured pain score was lower in the intervention group than in the control group (35 vs. 40 mm, P  = 0.035). There was no significant difference in the incidence of nausea between the groups (8.7 vs. 12.9%, P  = 0.357). CONCLUSION: The use of a combined PSP/IPP-block block before breast cancer surgery reduces the need for postoperative rescue morphine, even when compared with the use of intra-operative morphine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03117894.

Cardiorespiratory Response to Sedative Premedication in Preschool Children: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Midazolam, Clonidine, and Dexmedetomidine.

PURPOSE: Sedative premedication in children may negatively impact their cardiorespiratory status during the perioperative course, and no clear consensus exists on the optimal premedication treatment for pediatric patients. The objective was to compare the perioperative cardiorespiratory responses to sedation using three different sedative premedication regimens in preschool children scheduled for surgery with total intravenous anesthesia. DESIGN: A single-center randomized controlled trial. METHODS: This is a planned secondary analysis of a study conducted at a 200-bed tertiary referral hospital. Ninety children participated in the study. They were aged 2-6 years and scheduled for ear, nose, and throat surgery with propofol/remifentanil anesthesia. Participants were randomly assigned to receive oral midazolam 0.5 mg/kg-1 (MID), oral clonidine 4 mcg/kg-1 (CLO), or intranasal dexmedetomidine 2 mcg/kg-1 (DEX). The main outcome measures were the sedation level, based on the Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS), and cardiorespiratory status, monitored during the perioperative period. FINDINGS: The final cohort had 83 children (MID, n=27; CLO, n=26; DEX, n=30), with similar intergroup patient characteristics. RSS scores were lower in the MID group than in the CLO and DEX groups before induction and within 30 min postsurgery (P<0.001 and P=0.006, respectively). A negative correlation existed between the RSS and heart rate (HR) (r=-0.570, P<0.001). Before anesthesia induction, the respiratory rate was lowest in the DEX group (MID 21.5±1.7 min-1, CLO 20.6±2.6 min-1, DEX 20.2±1.7 min-1; P=0.042). The HR was lower in the CLO and DEX groups than in the MID group (MID, 102.8±10.0 min-1; CLO, 87.4±9.6 min-1; DEX, 87.6±7.9 min-1; P<0.001). The HR was lower immediately after induction (P=0.009) and intraoperatively (P=0.025) in the CLO and DEX groups than in the MID group. CONCLUSIONS: When used as premedication before propofol/remifentanil anesthesia, clonidine and dexmedetomidine provided deeper preoperative sedation compared to midazolam. From a clinical perspective, all three study drugs provided essentially stable cardiovascular and respiratory conditions during the entire perioperative period.

Pre-operative point-of-care assessment of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction, an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction is an acknowledged peri-operative risk factor that should be identified before surgery. This study aimed to evaluate a simplified echocardiographic method using e' and E/e' for identification and grading of diastolic dysfunction pre-operatively. METHODS: Ninety six ambulatory surgical patients were consecutively included to this prospective observational study. Pre-operative transthoracic echocardiography was conducted prior to surgery, and diagnosis of LV diastolic dysfunction was established by comprehensive and simplified assessment, and the results were compared. The accuracy of e'-velocities in order to discriminate patients with diastolic dysfunction was established by calculating accuracy, efficiency, positive (PPV) and negative predictive (NPV) values, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS: Comprehensive assessment established diastolic dysfunction in 77% (74/96) of patients. Of these, 22/74 was categorized as mild dysfunction, 43/74 as moderate dysfunction and 9/74 as severe dysfunction. Using the simplified method with e' and E/e', diastolic dysfunction was established in 70.8% (68/96) of patients. Of these, 8/68 was categorized as mild dysfunction, 36/68 as moderate dysfunction and 24/68 as severe dysfunction. To discriminate diastolic dysfunction of any grade, e'-velocities (mean < 9 cm s- 1) had an AUROC of 0.901 (95%CI 0.840-0.962), with a PPV of 55.2%, a NPV of 90.9% and a test efficiency of 0.78. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that a simplified approach with tissue Doppler e'-velocities may be used to rule out patients with diastolic dysfunction pre-operatively, but together with E/e' ratio the severity of diastolic dysfunction may be overestimated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, Identifier: NCT03349593 . Date of registration 21/11/2017. https://clinicaltrials.gov .

Preoperative anxiety in preschool children: A randomized clinical trial comparing midazolam, clonidine, and dexmedetomidine.

INTRODUCTION: Anxiety in pediatric patients may challenge perioperative anesthesiology management and worsen postoperative outcomes. Sedative drugs aimed to reducing anxiety are available with different pharmacologic profiles, and there is no consensus on their effect or the best option for preschool children. In this study, we aimed to compare the effect of three different premedications on anxiety before anesthesia induction in preschool children aged 2-6 years scheduled for elective surgery. The secondary outcomes comprised distress during peripheral catheter (PVC) insertion, compliance at anesthesia induction, and level of sedation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this double-blinded randomized clinical trial, we enrolled 90 participants aged 2-6 years, who were scheduled for elective ear-, nose-and-throat surgery. The participants were randomly assigned to three groups: those who were administered 0.5 mg/kg oral midazolam, 4 µg/kg oral clonidine, or 2 µg/kg intranasal dexmedetomidine. Anxiety, distress during PVC insertion, compliance with mask during preoxygenation, and sedation were measured using the modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale, Behavioral Distress Scale, Induction Compliance Checklist, and Ramsay Sedation Scale, respectively. RESULTS: Six children who refused premedication were excluded, leaving 84 enrolled patients. At baseline, all groups had similar levels of preoperative anxiety and distress. During anesthesia preparation, anxiety was increased in the children who received clonidine and dexmedetomidine; however, it remained unaltered in the midazolam group. There were no differences in distress during PVC insertion or compliance at induction between the groups. The children in the clonidine and dexmedetomidine groups developed higher levels of sedation than those in the midazolam group. CONCLUSIONS: In preschool children, midazolam resulted in a more effective anxiolysis and less sedation compared to clonidine and dexmedetomidine.

Early post-operative nausea and vomiting: A retrospective observational study of 2030 patients.

BACKGROUND: The overall risk of post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after general anaesthesia is reportedly 20%-40%. The first episode of PONV may occur early in the post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU) or later at the ward or after discharge at home in an ambulatory setting. This study aimed to investigate and describe the risk of early PONV in a PACU, and we hypothesised that patients and perioperative factors were associated with early PONV. METHODS: This single-centre retrospective observational study was conducted in a Swedish county hospital from January to June 2017 and included adult patients who underwent surgical procedures under general anaesthesia. Perioperative data were obtained by reviewing the local registry for surgical procedures, medical records and anaesthesia and post-operative charts. Early PONV was defined as PONV occurring up to 4 hours post-operatively at the PACU. Any notification in the medical records, perioperative charts or the registry regarding nausea, vomiting or PONV treatment was regarded as PONV. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed for factors associated with early PONV. RESULTS: A total of 2030 patients were included in the study, of which 9.6% (n = 194) experienced early PONV. Factors associated with a high risk of early PONV were suboptimal PONV prophylaxis, need for opioids, female sex, body mass index >35 kg m-2 and major surgery and anaesthesia time ≥60 minutes. CONCLUSION: We found that every 10th patient under general anaesthesia experienced early PONV. Suboptimal PONV prophylaxis and previously acknowledged risk factors for PONV were associated with early PONV.

Preoperative Point-of-Care Assessment of Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction With Transthoracic Echocardiography.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction is an acknowledged perioperative risk factor and should be identified before surgery. Conventional echocardiographic assessment of LV ejection fraction (LVEF) obtained by biplane LV volumes is the gold standard to detect LV systolic dysfunction. However, this modality needs extensive training and is time consuming. Hence, a feasible point-of-care screening method for this purpose is warranted. The aim of this study was to evaluate 3 point-of-care echocardiographic methods for identification of LV systolic dysfunction in comparison with biplane LVEF. METHODS: One hundred elective surgical patients, with a mean age of 63 ± 12 years and body mass index of 27 ± 4 kg/m2, were consecutively enrolled in this prospective observational study. Transthoracic echocardiography was conducted 1-2 hours before surgery. LVEF was obtained by automatic two-dimensional (2D) biplane ejection fraction (EF) software. We evaluated if Tissue Doppler Imaging peak systolic myocardial velocities (TDISm), anatomic M-mode E-point septal separation (EPSS), and conventional M-mode mitral annular plane systolic excursion (MAPSE) could discriminate LV systolic dysfunction (LVEF <50%) by calculating accuracy, efficiency, correlation, positive (PPV) respective negative predictive (NPV) values, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for each point-of-care method. RESULTS: LVEF<50% was identified in 22% (21 of 94) of patients. To discriminate an LVEF <50%, AUROC for TDISm (mean <8 cm/s) was 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62-0.84; P < .001), with a PPV of 47% and an NPV of 90%. EPSS with a cutoff value of >6 mm had an AUROC 0.89 (95% CI, 0.80-0.98; P < .001), with a PPV of 67% and an NPV of 96%. MAPSE (mean <12 mm) had an AUROC 0.80 (95% CI, 0.70-0.90; P < 0.001) with a PPV of 57% and an NPV of 98%. CONCLUSIONS: All 3 point-of-care methods performed reasonably well to discriminate patients with LVEF <50%. The clinician may choose the most suitable method according to praxis and observer experience.

Pre-operative transthoracic echocardiography in ambulatory surgery-A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac disease and aberrations in central volume status are risk factors for perioperative complications, and should be identified prior to surgery. This study investigated the benefit of transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) for pre-operative identification of cardiac disease and hypovolemia in ambulatory surgery. METHODS: Ninety-six patients, with a mean age of 63.5 ± 12.2 years and body mass index of 27.0 ± 4.3 kg/m2 , scheduled for ambulatory surgery (breast, thyroid, and minor gastrointestinal), were consecutively enrolled in this prospective observational study. Pre-operative comprehensive TTE was performed in order to assess heart failure (HF), asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction, valvular disease, and aberrations in central volume status. RESULTS: Pre-operative TTE identified a total of 28 cases of HF, 13 cases of HF with reduced or moderately reduced, ejection fraction (EF), and 15 cases of HF with preserved EF. Furthermore, 46 cases of asymptomatic left ventricular (LV) dysfunction were identified. 44/96 patients were hypovolemic, 16 of whom in severe hypovolemia. Seven cases of previously unknown obstructive valvular or myocardial disease and six cases of right ventricular systolic dysfunction were identified. A total of 24% (23/96) were classified as potential critical hemodynamic findings. The number needed (NNT) to treat for pre-operative TTE in order to find one critical finding was 4.2. CONCLUSION: In this ambulatory surgical cohort, a high prevalence of pre-operative LV dysfunction and aberrations in volume status was observed. The results demonstrate that pre-operative TTE contributed valuable hemodynamic information. The standard pre-operative assessment for this cohort might need to be revised.

Effect of preoperative fluid therapy on hemodynamic stability during anesthesia induction, a randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Preserving perfusion pressure during anesthesia induction is crucial. Standardized anesthesia methods, alert fluid therapy and vasoactive drugs may help maintain adequate hemodynamic conditions throughout the induction procedure. In this randomized study, we hypothesized that a pre-operative volume bolus based on lean body weight would decrease the incidence of significant blood pressure drops (BPD) after induction with target-controlled infusion (TCI) or rapid sequence induction (RSI). METHODS: Eighty individuals scheduled for non-cardiac surgery were randomized to either a pre-operative colloid fluid bolus of 6 ml kg-1 lean body weight or no bolus, and then anesthetized by means of TCI or RSI. The main outcome measure was blood pressure drops below the mean arterial pressure 65 mm Hg during the first 20 minutes after anesthesia induction. ClinicalTrials.com Identifier: NCT03394833. RESULTS: Pre-operative fluid therapy decreased the incidence of BPDs fivefold, from 23 of 40 (57.5%) individuals without fluids to 5 of 40 (12.5%) with fluid management, P < .001. The mean BPD was greater in the groups without pre-operative fluids compared to the groups with fluid management; 53 ± 18 mm Hg vs 43 ± 14 mm Hg, P = .007. The overall mean volume of pre-operative fluid bolus infused was 387 ± 52 ml. There was no difference in hemodynamic stability between TCI and RSI. No correlation was shown between incidence of BPDs and increasing age, medication, hypertension, diabetes, renal failure, or low physical capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-operative fluid bolus decreased the incidence of significant blood pressure drops during TCI and RSI induction of general anesthesia.