[Review of initiatives carried out in Spain to implement teaching of basic cardiopulmonary reanimation in schools]. / Revisión de las iniciativas llevadas a cabo en España para implementar la enseñanza de la reanimación cardiopulmonar básica en las escuelas.

Cardiorespiratory arrest (CRA) is a situation of maximum medical emergency which can be potentially reversed if basic cardiopulmonary resuscitation manoeuvres (CPR) are provided by the first bystander. Nonetheless, this is done in less than 25 % of the cardiorespiratory arrests (CRA) witnessed by bystanders. Thus, it is urgent to increase the knowledge of such basic CPR manoeuvres among the public in general. One strategy consists in the teaching of basic CPR techniques in schools following the recommendations made by specialized institutions. This study analyzes the initiatives carried out in Spain, including the authors' own experience acquired during the development of PROCES, a program aimed a students from 15 to 16 years of age and carried out during the last 10 years in Barcelona.

Cost-effectiveness of three combinations of antiemetics in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

BACKGROUND: This study compares the cost-effectiveness of three combinations of antiemetics in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). METHODS: We conducted a prospective, double-blind study. Ninety ASA I-II females, 18-65 yr, undergoing general anaesthesia for major gynaecological surgery, with standardized postoperative analgesia (intrathecal 0.2 mg plus i.v. PCA morphine), were randomly assigned to receive: ondansetron 4 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after induction and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 1); dexamethasone 8 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after induction and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 2); ondansetron 4 mg plus dexamethasone 8 mg after induction and placebo 12 h later (Group 3). A decision analysis tree was used to divide each group into nine mutually exclusive subgroups, depending on the incidence of PONV, need for rescue therapy, side effects and their treatment. Direct cost and probabilities were calculated for each subgroup, then a cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from the hospital point of view. RESULTS: Groups 1 and 3 were more effective (80 and 70%) than Group 2 (40%, P=0.004) in preventing PONV but also more expensive. Compared with Group 2, the incremental cost per extra patient without PONV was euro;6.99 (95% CI, -1.26 to 36.57) for Group 1 and euro;13.55 (95% CI, 0.89-132.90) for Group 3. CONCLUSION: Ondansetron+droperidol is cheaper and at least as effective as ondansetron+ dexamethasone, and it is more effective than dexamethasone+droperidol with a reasonable extra cost.

A comparison of three antiemetic combinations for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

UNLABELLED: In this study we compared the efficacy and safety of three antiemetic combinations in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Ninety ASA status I-II women, aged 18-65 yr, undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery, were included in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. A standardized anesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia (intrathecal morphine plus IV patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine) were used in all patients. Patients were randomly assigned to receive ondansetron 4 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after the induction of anesthesia and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 1, n = 30), dexamethasone 8 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after the induction of anesthesia and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 2, n = 30), or ondansetron 4 mg plus dexamethasone 8 mg after the induction of anesthesia and placebo 12 h later (Group 3, n = 30). A complete response, defined as no PONV in 48 h, occurred in 80% of patients in Group 1, 70% in Group 3, and 40% in Group 2 (P = 0.004 versus Groups 1 and 3). The incidences of side effects and other variables that could modify the incidence of PONV were similar among groups. In conclusion, ondansetron, in combination with droperidol or dexamethasone, is more effective than dexamethasone in combination with droperidol in women undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery with intrathecal morphine plus IV PCA with morphine for postoperative analgesia. IMPLICATIONS: The combination of ondansetron plus dexamethasone or droperidol was significantly better than the combination of dexamethasone plus droperidol in the prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery, with intrathecal and IV morphine (patient-controlled analgesia) for management of postoperative pain.

[Video-assisted thoracoscopy for resecting solitary pulmonary nodules]. / Videotoracoscopia en la resección de nódulos pulmonares solitarios.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of video assisted thoracoscopy in the resection of solitary pulmonary nodules. Thirty-three patients with solitary pulmonary nodules diagnosed by video assisted thoracoscopy were enrolled prospectively. A preoperative computed tomography scan was obtained for each patient. Harpoons were implanted preoperatively to locate the lesion in patients whose tumors were in the parenchyma. When endoscopic resection proved impossible in five patients, the surgeon resorted to thoracotomy. All were diagnosed after the procedure. One was a case of pulmonary lymphoma, 2 were primary adenocarcinomas of the lung, 2 were oat-cell cancers, 1 was Wegener's disease, 4 were tuberculomas, 3 involved pulmonary infarction and 20 were single pulmonary metastases. Patients who needed thoracotomy required more days of postsurgical drainage (p < 0.05). The size of resected nodules ranged from 0.4 to 6 centimeters. Preoperative positron emission tomographs were available for four patients. No perioperative (< 30 days) mortality occurred and morbidity consisted of one case of prolonged airway leak (> 7 days). Use of video-assisted thoracoscopy reduced perioperative morbidity and hospital stay.

Combination of ondansetron and droperidol in the prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of ondansetron plus droperidol with each drug alone or placebo in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). One hundred females, aged 18-65 yr, ASA physical status I-II, undergoing general anesthesia for elective abdominal surgery were included in a prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study. A standardized anesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia (ketorolac plus patient-controlled analgesia [PCA] with morphine) were used in all patients. Patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo (Group 1, n = 25), droperidol 2.5 mg with induction of anesthesia and 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 2, n = 25), ondansetron 4 mg with induction (Group 3, n = 25), and ondansetron plus droperidol at the same doses as Groups 3 and 2, respectively (Group 4, n = 25). A complete response, defined as no PONV in 48 h, occurred in 28% of patients in Group 1, 60% in Group 2 (P < 0.05 vs Group 1), 56% in Group 3 (P < 0.05 vs Group 1), and 92% in Group 4 (P < 0.01 vs Groups 1, 2, and 3). Sedation was significantly greater with droperidol (Groups 2 and 4) for 12 h postoperatively. In conclusion, the combination of ondansetron plus droperidol was more effective than each antiemetic alone or placebo in the prevention of PONV in women undergoing elective abdominal surgery.

Combination of ondansetron and dexamethasone in the prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

We studied 100 ASA I-II females undergoing general anaesthesia for major gynaecological surgery, in a prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study. Patients received one of four regimens for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV): ondansetron 4 mg (n = 25), dexamethasone 8 mg (n = 25), ondansetron with dexamethasone (4 mg and 8 mg, respectively, n = 25) or placebo (saline, n = 25) There were no differences in background factors or factors related to operation and anaesthesia, morphine consumption, pain or side effects between groups. The incidence of nausea and emetic episodes in the ondansetron with dexamethasone group was lower than in the placebo (P < 0.01), ondansetron (P < 0.05) and dexamethasone (P = 0.057) groups. There were no differences between ondansetron and dexamethasone, and both were more effective than placebo (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively). Dexamethasone appeared to be preferable in preventing nausea than emetic episodes. Fewer patients in the ondansetron with dexamethasone group needed antimetic rescue (P < 0.01 vs placebo and P < 0.05 vs ondansetron). We conclude that prophylactic administration of combined ondansetron and dexamethasone is effective in preventing PONV.