Anaesthetics
Browse by
Recent Submissions
-
Articaine and mepivacaine buccal infiltration in securing mandibular first molar pulp anesthesia following mepivacaine inferior alveolar nerve block: A randomized, double-blind crossover studyAims: A crossover double-blind, randomized study was designed to explore the efficacy of 2% mepivacaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline buccal infiltration and 4% articaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline buccal infiltration following 2% mepivacaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) for testing pulp anesthesia of mandibular first molar teeth in adult volunteers. Materials and methods: A total of 23 healthy adult volunteers received two regimens with at least 1-week apart; one with 4% articaine buccal infiltration and 2% mepivacaine IANB (articaine regimen) and another with 2% mepivacaine buccal infiltration supplemented to 2% mepivacaine IANB (mepivacaine regimen). Pulp testing of first molar tooth was electronically measured twice at baseline, then at intervals of 2 min for the first 10 min, then every 5 min until 45 min postinjection. Anesthetic success was considered when two consecutive maximal stimulation on pulp testing readings without sensation were obtained within 10 min and continuously sustained for 45 min postinjection. Results: In total, the number of no sensations to maximum pulp testing for first molar teeth were significantly higher after articaine regimen than mepivacaine during 45 min postinjection (267 vs. 250 episodes, respectively, P < 0.001), however, both articaine and mepivacaine buccal infiltrations are equally effective in securing anesthetic success for first molar pulp anesthesia when supplemented to mepivacaine IANB injections (P > 0.05). Interestingly, volunteers in the articaine regimen provided faster onset and longer duration (means 2.78 min, 42.22 min, respectively) than mepivacaine regimen (means 4.26 min, 40.74 min, respectively) for first molar pulp anesthesia (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Supplementary mepivacaine and articaine buccal infiltrations produced similar successful first molar pulp anesthesia following mepivacaine IANB injections in volunteers. Articaine buccal infiltration produced faster onset and longer duration than mepivacaine buccal infiltration following mepivacaine IANB injections.
-
Informed consent for surgery on neck of femur fractures: A multi-loop clinical auditBackground: The Montgomery case in 2015 resulted in a pivotal change in practice, leading to a patient-centric approach for informed consent. Neck of femur (NOF) fractures are associated with a high rates perioperative morbidity and mortality. Using guidelines highlighted by the British Orthopaedic Association we performed a multi-loop audit within our department to assess the adequacy of informed consent for NOF fractures. Methods: Two prior cycles had been performed utilising a similar framework. Prior interventions included ward posters, verbal dissemination of information at Junior Doctor's (JD) induction and amendments to the JD handbook. For the latest audit loop, a retrospective analysis of 100 patients was performed. Risk were classified as common, less common, rare and 'other' non-classifiable risks. The adequacy of informed consent was evaluated by assessing the quality and accuracy of documentation in the signed Consent Form-1s for compos mentis patients. Results: Infection, bleeding risks, clots and anaesthetic risks were documented in all patients (100%). Areas of improvement included documentation of neurovascular injuries (98%), pain (75%) and altered wound healing (69%). There was no significant change in the documentation of failure of surgery (83%) and neurovascular injuries (98%). Poorly documented risk factors included mortality (21%), prosthetic dislocation (14%) and limb length discrepancy (6%). Conclusion: Following the latest cycle, the trust has now approved the use of 2 consent-specific stickers (for arthroplasty or fixation), amendable on a patient-to-patient basis. As part of the multi-loop process, the cycle will be repeated every year, in line with Junior Doctor rotations. Medical professionals have an ethical, moral and legal obligation to ensure they provide all information regarding surgical interventions to aid patients in making an informed decision.