Self-study and online interactive case-based discussion to improve knowledge of medical students in the COVID-19 era.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine whether a new online interactive learning method for fifth-year medical students could improve their knowledge of pre- and postoperative care during the COVID-19 era. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted from June 2020 to May 2022 during the pre- and postoperative care course for fifth-year medical students in a university hospital in southern Thailand. Students in the 2020 cohort received only a 60-minute lecture on spinal anesthesia via Zoom while a 3-step online interactive learning method was used for the 2021 cohort. Step 1: students performed self-study comprised of video lectures and case-based discussion one week before the online class with a pre-test submitted via Google forms. Step 2: an online interactive case-based discussion class was performed via Zoom by two experienced anesthesia staff and a post-test was submitted by the students via Google forms. Step 3: a small group discussion of course evaluation between 13 representatives of students and anesthesia staff was performed via Zoom. A comparison of the post-test and pre-test scores containing 20 multiple choice questions as well as the final exam scores before (2020) and after (2021) the new interactive learning was performed using a t-test. RESULTS: There were 136 and 117 students in the 2020 and 2021 academic years, respectively. The final mean (SD) exam scores for the 2020 and 2021 academic years were 70.3 (8.4) and 72.5 (9.0), respectively with a mean (95% confidence interval (CI)) difference of 2.2 (4.3, -0.02). In 2021, the mean (95% CI) difference between the post-test and pre-test scores was 5.8 (5.1, 6.5). The student representatives were satisfied with the new learning method and gave insightful comments, which were subsequently implemented in the 2022 academic year course. CONCLUSION: The new interactive learning method improved the knowledge of fifth-year medical students attending pre- and postoperative care course during the COVID-19 era. The final exam scores may not be suitable to represent the overall outcomes of the new interactive learning method. Using an online two-way communication method can improve the overall satisfaction and course adaptation during the COVID-19 era.

The anxiolytic effects of preoperative administration of pregabalin in comparison to diazepam and placebo.

We aimed to evaluate the potential anxiolytic effects of premedication with pregabalin, compared with diazepam and placebo. We conducted this non-inferiority, double-blind, randomized controlled trial in ASA classification I-II patients aged 18-70 years, scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia. They were allocated to receive pregabalin (75 mg the night before surgery and 150 mg 2 h before surgery), diazepam (5 and 10 mg in the same manner) or placebo. Preoperative anxiety was evaluated using verbal numerical rating scale (VNRS) and Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Scale (APAIS) before and after premedication. Sleep quality, sedation level, and adverse effects were assessed as secondary outcomes. A total of 231 patients were screened and 224 completed the trial. The mean change (95%CI) in anxiety scores from before to after medication in pregabalin, diazepam, and placebo groups for VNRS were - 0.87 (- 1.43, - 0.30), - 1.17 (- 1.74, - 0.60), and - 0.99 (- 1.56, - 0.41), and for APAIS were - 0.38 (- 1.04, 0.28), - 0.83 (- 1.49, - 0.16), and - 0.27 (- 0.95, 0.40). The difference in change for pregabalin versus diazepam was 0.30 (- 0.50, 1.11) for VNRS and 0.45 (- 0.49, 1.38) for APAIS, exceeding the limit of inferiority for APAIS of 1.3. Sleep quality was statistically different between pregabalin and placebo groups (p = 0.048). Sedation in pregabalin and diazepam groups were significantly higher than placebo group (p = 0.008). No significant differences of other side effects, except dry mouth was higher in placebo group compared with diazepam (p = 0.006). The study filed to provide evidence at non-inferiority of pregabalin compared to diazepam. Furthermore, premedication with either pregabalin or diazepam did not significantly reduce the preoperative anxiety in comparison to placebo, despite the fact that both resulted in higher levels of sedation. Clinicians should weigh the benefits and risks of premedication with these 2 drugs.Thai Clinical Trials Registry: TCTR20190424001 (24/04/2019) Registry URL: https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/ .

A comparison of ondansetron and lidocaine in reducing injection pain of propofol: a randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Direct stimulation of the afferent nerve endings in the venous endothelium is one explanation of propofol injection pain. Previous studies found that ondansetron can also block sodium channels. This effect is similar to that of lidocaine. OBJECTIVE: The primary outcome was the efficacy of ondansetron compared to lidocaine and placebo for the reduction of propofol injection pain. METHOD: This trial was conducted in 240 patients, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification I-III and aged between 18-65 years old, undergoing elective surgery, and having a 20-gauge intravenous catheter at the hand dorsum. Each group of 80 patients received 8 mg. of ondansetron in the O Group, 40 mg. of lidocaine in the L Group and normal saline in the C Group. The study medications were blindly administered to the patients through a 20-gauge intravenous catheter placed on the hand dorsum, and then 1 min later, the small dose of propofol (50 mg.) was infused via the syringe pump at a rate of 600 ml/hr. for 30 s. Following that, the syringe pump of propofol was temporarily stopped, and the patients were asked to rate their pain at the injection site. RESULT: The incidence of pain was lowest in the L group (66.2%) compared with the O (82.5%) and the C groups (85.0%) (P < 0.01). The median pain score in the L, O, and C groups were 2 (0-4), 4 (2-5), and 4.5 (2-6), respectively (P < 0.01). The incidences of no pain, mild, moderate, and severe pain were also significantly different in the L group (33.8%, 37.5%, 21.2%, and 7.5%, respectively) compared with those in the O group (17.5%, 31.2%, 31.2%, and 20.0%, respectively) and the C groups (15.0%, 22.5%, 40.0%, and 22.5%, respectively) (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Pretreatment with intravenous lidocaine, rather than ondansetron, can reduce the incidence and intensity of propofol-induced pain.

Predictors of death after receiving a modified Blalock-Taussig shunt in cyanotic heart children: A competing risk analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine risk factors affecting time-to-death ≤90 and >90 days in children who underwent a modified Blalock-Taussig shunt (MBTS). METHODS: Data from a retrospective cohort study were obtained from children aged 0-3 years who experienced MBTS between 2005 and 2016. Time-to-death (prior to Glenn/repair), time-to-alive up until December 2017 without repair, and time-to-progression to Glenn/repair following MBTS were presented using competing risks survival analysis. Demographic, surgical and anesthesia-related factors were recorded. Time-to-death ≤90 days and >90 days was analyzed using multivariate time-dependent Cox regression models to identify independent predictors and presented by adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Of 380 children, 119 died, 122 survived and 139 progressed to Glenn/repair. Time-to-death probability (95% CI) within 90 days was 0.18 (0.14-0.22). Predictors of time-to-death ≤90 days (n = 63) were low weight (<3 kg) (HR 7.6, 95% CI:2.8-20.4), preoperative ventilator support (HR 2.7, 95% CI:1.3-5.6), postoperative shunt thrombosis (HR 5.0, 95% CI:2.4-10.4), bleeding (HR 4.5, 95% CI:2.1-9.4) and renal failure (HR 4.1, 95% CI:1.5-10.9). Predictors of time-to-death >90 days (n = 56) were children diagnosed with pulmonary atresia with ventricular septal defect and single ventricle (compared to tetralogy of fallot) (HR 3.2, 95% CI:1.2-7.7 and HR 3.1, 95% CI:1.3-7.6, respectively), shunt size/weight ratio >1.1 vs <0.65 (HR 6.8, 95% CI:1.4-32.6) and longer duration of mechanical ventilator (HR 1.002, 95% CI:1.001-1.004). Shunt size/weight ratio ≥1.0 (vs <1.0) and ≥0.65 (vs <0.65) were predictors for overall time-to-death in neonates and toddlers, respectively (HR 13.1, 95% CI:2.8-61.4 and HR 7.8, 95% CI:1.7-34.8, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative factors were associated with time-to-death ≤90 days, whereas particular cardiac defect, larger shunt size/weight ratio, and longer mechanical ventilation were associated with time-to-death >90 days after receiving MBTS. Larger shunt size/weight ratio should be reevaluated within 90 days to minimize the risk of shunt over flow.