RESUMO
Purpose Enhanced recovery protocols for total hip arthroplasty (THA), using opioid-sparing techniques have become widely used. Reports of novel additions to multimodal pain control regimens have been published, however, a paucity of literature exists on the use of intravenous dexmedetomidine. In this study, we analyzed our experience with intravenous dexmedetomidine and hypothesized that it would reduce postoperative opioid use. Secondary outcomes were also examined, including post-operative hypotension, hemoglobin, length of stay, and discharge disposition. Methods All patients who underwent primary THA at a single tertiary-level center between January 1, 2016, and September 1, 2019, underwent investigation. Diagnosis, surgical approach, anesthetic type, body mass index (BMI), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score were recorded. Postoperative clinical measures were analyzed, adjusting for patient and surgical characteristics. Results Of the 599 patients included in the study, 218 patients received intravenous (IV) dexmedetomidine, at a mean dose of 44.9 mg during their operative event. Using a multivariate model, patients in the IV dexmedetomidine group were estimated to have received 24% elevated morphine milligram equivalent at postoperative day zero compared to those in the control group (p = 0.05). In addition, patients in the IV dexmedetomidine group who underwent spinal anesthesia had increased odds of hypotension 3.47 times that of the control [odds ratio (OR) 1.43-8.43, p=0.006]. Conclusions Surprisingly, we found no opioid-sparing effects with the use of IV dexmedetomidine. IV dexmedetomidine may be used cautiously as an anesthesia adjunct with spinal anesthesia in the setting of primary THA, as the experience at our institution illustrated increased odds of postoperative hypotension. Level of evidence This retrospective case-control study has a level of evidence III.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Patients with limited English proficiency frequently receive substandard health care. Asynchronous telepsychiatry (ATP) has been established as a clinically valid method for psychiatric assessments. The addition of automated speech recognition (ASR) and automated machine translation (AMT) technologies to asynchronous telepsychiatry may be a viable artificial intelligence (AI)-language interpretation option. OBJECTIVE: This project measures the frequency and accuracy of the translation of figurative language devices (FLDs) and patient word count per minute, in a subset of psychiatric interviews from a larger trial, as an approximation to patient speech complexity and quantity in clinical encounters that require interpretation. METHODS: A total of 6 patients were selected from the original trial, where they had undergone 2 assessments, once by an English-speaking psychiatrist through a Spanish-speaking human interpreter and once in Spanish by a trained mental health interviewer-researcher with AI interpretation. 3 (50%) of the 6 selected patients were interviewed via videoconferencing because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Interview transcripts were created by automated speech recognition with manual corrections for transcriptional accuracy and assessment for translational accuracy of FLDs. RESULTS: AI-interpreted interviews were found to have a significant increase in the use of FLDs and patient word count per minute. Both human and AI-interpreted FLDs were frequently translated inaccurately, however FLD translation may be more accurate on videoconferencing. CONCLUSIONS: AI interpretation is currently not sufficiently accurate for use in clinical settings. However, this study suggests that alternatives to human interpretation are needed to circumvent modifications to patients' speech. While AI interpretation technologies are being further developed, using videoconferencing for human interpreting may be more accurate than in-person interpreting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03538860; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03538860.
